Hm, not sure how this is a dup? Original article said what BAE systems were working on in the UK (but did not even have a working prototype of); this article says what DARPA and Boyce are working on in the US (but also no working prototype).
Too, DARPA's project seems to be focused on combining bio and electronic/mechanical systems, while BAE's was basically a robot.
Ah, nice. Answer just the one part of the post you (think) have an answer to, ignore the rest of it, make a statement without verifiable fact to back it up, and throw in an invalid and incorrect assumptions about the poster.
Fine argumentative technique. Good day sir, I had a feeling I was wasting my time in the first place, but chose to give you the benefit of the doubt. No worries, it won't happen again.
No company does anything out of the goodness of their heart unless it will lead to greater profits and/or market dominance.
And that is why your generation sucks balls. We hate you and want you to hurry up and die. The younger generations seem to have a little heart. And yes, I run a company, and yes, we have a heart.
You run a private company, not a public corporation, yes? Companies owned by individuals/small groups have no problem in the "heart" department.
Instead what happened was antibiotics were handed out like candy and people weren't made to complete their courses.
If you stop taking antibiotics before the whole course is complete, any remaining bacteria are those which have some resistance (but in the beginning not enough to survive a completed course). Multiply this by the millions of people who didn't complete their courses over the decades, and you have trouble.
20 years ago, the medical authorities proscribed 2 weeks worth of antibiotics. Later, it dropped to 10 days. Now, a 4 day proscription is normal.
Why?
I don't get it. It seems to conflict with what you just described.
Good question. I've just been assuming that "they" are just getting better at making more effective antibiotics.
An unstated argument here is that people distributing medicine and those who don't take their full course are somehow at fault.
Erm, that's because it is their fault. Nothing unstated about it. When getting antibiotics, the vast majority of people get either the full course or nothing at all - there's no in-between. If you choose not to take the full course after receiving it, it's your fault.
Of course there are plenty of people who can't get the drugs at all - but that's not germane to this conversation as such people are not contributing to drug-resistant bacteria.
Does it really make moral sense that farm animals are over treated and people end up with half treatments?
It must be fun building up so many straw men. That's the only reason I can figure that you have for doing it so often.
Do you think that people really want to have less than proper medicine?
Yes. As is evidenced by the fact that so many people think that because the "feel fine now" they don't have to finish their course of meds.
This is how bad DRM has become. Consumers are at the mercy of manufacturers of DRM laden products.
I don't understand why they didn't return the Sony DVD player as defective? If more people did that, then perhaps we wouldn't be as much at their mercy as we are now...
. If I suddenly judge your stupidity for believing in religion (fairy tales), I'm suddenly a hatemongering elitist. Go stick your dick in another twelve year old you fucking cry baby.
Recent criticism of the use of myriad as a noun, both in the plural form myriads and in the phrase a myriad of, seems to reflect a mistaken belief that the word was originally and is still properly only an adjective. As the entries here show, however, the noun is in fact the older form, dating to the 16th century. The noun myriad has appeared in the works of such writers as Milton (plural myriads) and Thoreau (a myriad of), and it continues to occur frequently in reputable English. There is no reason to avoid it.
Usage Note: Throughout most of its history in English myriad was used as a noun, as in a myriad of men. In the 19th century it began to be used in poetry as an adjective, as in myriad men. Both usages in English are acceptable, as in Samuel Taylor Coleridge's "Myriad myriads of lives." This poetic, adjectival use became so well entrenched generally that many people came to consider it as the only correct use. In fact, both uses in English are parallel with those of the original ancient Greek. The Greek word mÅrias, from which myriad derives, could be used as either a noun or an adjective, but the noun mÅrias was used in general prose and in mathematics while the adjective mÅrias was used only in poetry.
That makes sense, thanks.
If they're actually relying on that 20 byte hash, I would say this tool is even more useless than it first seems (which is impressive) - except possibly as a tool to encourage 'settlements' with people who don't know better.
Say... that raises an interesting (to me) question.
How do they get those known illegal hash values in the first place? Sounds like somebody had to visit pirate bay and run a torrent download to completion in order to determine the hash... given the nature of most bittorrent clients, and the flimsy evidence used to present such cases, that means these people have been Making Available! Burn them!
Hey look, that pixel at 1:37:24 of that James Bond movie got changed from red to blue! Looks like the entire hash will be completely different now.
Also meaning that a new way of validating torrents is needed -- since any client checksum of that segment would fail. Or creating many torrents of the same thing, but that would seem to defeat the purpose.
-Roadside cameras reading every license plate to find stolen cars and people with warrants on them.
Alright, I know this won't be a popular view, but is that a Bad Idea?
I don't mean the theoretical slippery slope arguments about loss of privacy - if you're out driving, you don't have it to begin with. Who loses in this scenario? The guy who gets his car back... guess not him. The people driving legal cars? Nuh uh. The people driving who have no outstanding warrants? Nope, not them either. Seems the list of people who actually lose is pretty narrow (ie, those who have stolen or have warrants out for them).
Naturally, it can be abused - Anything designed to aid law enforcement can be abused and it would be a lie to say that such tools are/not/ ever abused. But is that enough to make it a bad idea?
Note to self: this post has not received enough replies stating how it should not have gotten an any Insightful moderation. Reply with another post to point out the same thing when you have time.
Because the founding fathers would have put into writing, "Most of our citizens are idiots"? These people were every bit the politicians that we have today, this is very much apparent from reading the things they have written. Calling the people you're trying to gather support from "stupid" is a great way to lose support.
You're right - they did question the education level and not the intelligence level. But you can't exclude the possibility that they did not publicly question the intelligence level simply because it would have been political suicide.
The people who try to take charge/always/ believe they know better than anyone else. With rare exception, that's simply nature of being the kind of person who tries to assume control.
Slashdot Mirror
Too, DARPA's project seems to be focused on combining bio and electronic/mechanical systems, while BAE's was basically a robot.
The campaign is now spreading like fire on Twitter (#IE6), and starting to become an amazing effort by big Media companies to get rid of IE6!
Really? We need this here?
Yeah, ONE place. Their ipod/phone app. What if they want to listen to it on their computer? or put it on their kids mp3 device?
Then they do without. The pain and horror.
Try a dose of perspective, it's liberating.
Otherwise, if you're willing to click through it (or get your cat to click through it on your behalf) then it doesn't bother you all that much.
Fine argumentative technique. Good day sir, I had a feeling I was wasting my time in the first place, but chose to give you the benefit of the doubt. No worries, it won't happen again.
. This might be worth looking into.
No company does anything out of the goodness of their heart unless it will lead to greater profits and/or market dominance.
And that is why your generation sucks balls. We hate you and want you to hurry up and die. The younger generations seem to have a little heart. And yes, I run a company, and yes, we have a heart.
You run a private company, not a public corporation, yes? Companies owned by individuals/small groups have no problem in the "heart" department.
This seems to be a copy-paste of the comment on the article. Did you make that one as well?
Instead what happened was antibiotics were handed out like candy and people weren't made to complete their courses.
If you stop taking antibiotics before the whole course is complete, any remaining bacteria are those which have some resistance (but in the beginning not enough to survive a completed course). Multiply this by the millions of people who didn't complete their courses over the decades, and you have trouble.
20 years ago, the medical authorities proscribed 2 weeks worth of antibiotics. Later, it dropped to 10 days. Now, a 4 day proscription is normal.
Why? I don't get it. It seems to conflict with what you just described.
Good question. I've just been assuming that "they" are just getting better at making more effective antibiotics.
An unstated argument here is that people distributing medicine and those who don't take their full course are somehow at fault.
Erm, that's because it is their fault. Nothing unstated about it. When getting antibiotics, the vast majority of people get either the full course or nothing at all - there's no in-between. If you choose not to take the full course after receiving it, it's your fault.
Of course there are plenty of people who can't get the drugs at all - but that's not germane to this conversation as such people are not contributing to drug-resistant bacteria.
Does it really make moral sense that farm animals are over treated and people end up with half treatments?
It must be fun building up so many straw men. That's the only reason I can figure that you have for doing it so often.
Do you think that people really want to have less than proper medicine?
Yes. As is evidenced by the fact that so many people think that because the "feel fine now" they don't have to finish their course of meds.
This is how bad DRM has become. Consumers are at the mercy of manufacturers of DRM laden products.
I don't understand why they didn't return the Sony DVD player as defective? If more people did that, then perhaps we wouldn't be as much at their mercy as we are now...
Heh - the sad truth is that no other groups care enough to bother getting involved.
. If I suddenly judge your stupidity for believing in religion (fairy tales), I'm suddenly a hatemongering elitist. Go stick your dick in another twelve year old you fucking cry baby.
Ah the irony.
Our government should not be in the business of making it more expensive for me to go see my family 100 miles away.
But I assume that you agree they should make it /possible/ to see your family 100 miles away?
Thereby making it more expensive for me for you to see your family 100 miles away.
Not if tolls are used in lieu of taxes ;)
Wouldn't the probability be heavily weighted in favor of "1" to "1"? Think of all the minor edits that typically get done to existing files...
Our government should not be in the business of making it more expensive for me to go see my family 100 miles away.
But I assume that you agree they should make it /possible/ to see your family 100 miles away?
I would encourage you (and the mods presumably) to look this up in a reputable English dictionary
From Merriam-Webster:
Recent criticism of the use of myriad as a noun, both in the plural form myriads and in the phrase a myriad of, seems to reflect a mistaken belief that the word was originally and is still properly only an adjective. As the entries here show, however, the noun is in fact the older form, dating to the 16th century. The noun myriad has appeared in the works of such writers as Milton (plural myriads) and Thoreau (a myriad of), and it continues to occur frequently in reputable English. There is no reason to avoid it.
Some more: Cambridge
Oxford
dictionary.reference.com says:
Usage Note: Throughout most of its history in English myriad was used as a noun, as in a myriad of men. In the 19th century it began to be used in poetry as an adjective, as in myriad men. Both usages in English are acceptable, as in Samuel Taylor Coleridge's "Myriad myriads of lives." This poetic, adjectival use became so well entrenched generally that many people came to consider it as the only correct use. In fact, both uses in English are parallel with those of the original ancient Greek. The Greek word mÅrias, from which myriad derives, could be used as either a noun or an adjective, but the noun mÅrias was used in general prose and in mathematics while the adjective mÅrias was used only in poetry.
Unfortunately, violence is the ultimate form of control.
I love Ghandi quotes!
Oh, wait...
Neanderthal.
Curse you for making me go research...
That makes sense, thanks. If they're actually relying on that 20 byte hash, I would say this tool is even more useless than it first seems (which is impressive) - except possibly as a tool to encourage 'settlements' with people who don't know better.
Say... that raises an interesting (to me) question.
How do they get those known illegal hash values in the first place? Sounds like somebody had to visit pirate bay and run a torrent download to completion in order to determine the hash... given the nature of most bittorrent clients, and the flimsy evidence used to present such cases, that means these people have been Making Available! Burn them!
Hey look, that pixel at 1:37:24 of that James Bond movie got changed from red to blue! Looks like the entire hash will be completely different now.
Also meaning that a new way of validating torrents is needed -- since any client checksum of that segment would fail. Or creating many torrents of the same thing, but that would seem to defeat the purpose.
-Roadside cameras reading every license plate to find stolen cars and people with warrants on them.
Alright, I know this won't be a popular view, but is that a Bad Idea?
I don't mean the theoretical slippery slope arguments about loss of privacy - if you're out driving, you don't have it to begin with. Who loses in this scenario? The guy who gets his car back... guess not him. The people driving legal cars? Nuh uh. The people driving who have no outstanding warrants? Nope, not them either. Seems the list of people who actually lose is pretty narrow (ie, those who have stolen or have warrants out for them).
Naturally, it can be abused - Anything designed to aid law enforcement can be abused and it would be a lie to say that such tools are /not/ ever abused. But is that enough to make it a bad idea?
Note to self: this post has not received enough replies stating how it should not have gotten an any Insightful moderation. Reply with another post to point out the same thing when you have time.
Read the federalist papers.
Because the founding fathers would have put into writing, "Most of our citizens are idiots"? These people were every bit the politicians that we have today, this is very much apparent from reading the things they have written. Calling the people you're trying to gather support from "stupid" is a great way to lose support.
You're right - they did question the education level and not the intelligence level. But you can't exclude the possibility that they did not publicly question the intelligence level simply because it would have been political suicide.
The people who try to take charge /always/ believe they know better than anyone else. With rare exception, that's simply nature of being the kind of person who tries to assume control.