The US argument is presumably that the copyright owners are in the US, but so what? If I injure a German person while he visits France, should I be extradited to Germany from France? This whole issue just seems bizarre.
I think this needs some clarification. It goes like this: if you commit the crime of pissing off a corporation based in the US you should be "extradited" into the sun. Failing that (due to the still quite inefficient technology nowadays) we'll do the next best thing: 10 years in a US pound-me-in-the-ass prison and additionally a fine of half a million US dollars. That'll teach ya;)
I'm using both browsers and although Opera starts up faster (even faster than both, my old Mozilla Firebird 0.7 or Mozilla 0.9.x I still have installed) and generally is less of a resource hog I still prefer to use Firefox. Even though I need to restart it due to the memory leak problem (which is mitigated by the built in session manager). Why? One word: customization. If I can not get plug-ins or a Greasemonkey script to do what I want I still can try to delve into the code and "fix" stuff myself.
As a normal browser for Joe Shmoe and his grandma though, I don't really see how Opera could not compete. It is very usable, at least as usable as the other browsers. It's got this new Speed Dial function (when opening a new tab instead of a black screen you'll get a cached thumbnail view of your favorite webpages to click on - real slick) and supports mouse gestures from the get go. It's definitely got the potential to become the main player. The only reason why it is not as popular is because Firefox has been propagated as the main alternative by most people anti-IE/MS, maybe in part because both those browsers stand for such different concepts/philosophies (greedy corporation vs. open source).
Also, Firefox didn't come out of nowhere. Actually quite the contrary: while Netscape (which evolved to Mozilla) was "doing their thing" (i.e. carving more and more market share from Mosaic and other browsers in the early days), whammo! - suddenly there was MS IE pre-installed as the default browser on Windows 95. Suddenly every MS box ran IE because there was no real need to run another browser (and it was faster too). The only edge that Mozilla had and what makes it the favorite alternative browser now is that it was and is open source.
I beg to differ. They may not be worth very much, but there are Congolese Francs, or Franc Congolais as we snobs like to call them. Due to the 9% inflation rate in Congo I'd go for the Djiboutian Franc though, it's pegged to the US dollar, which means that laptop will only cost 31100 Djiboutian Francs - a real bargain!:)
True, the Spanish War ended in 1939 and a lot of the "trouble makers" were executed to quell any future potential for a new uprising. The thing is that a man came into power whose ideology and policies were in line with those of people like Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet or Saddam Hussein, yet no one seemed to care. Instead, (military) interventions were conducted all over the world and all of them ignored, sometimes even supported fascist dictatorships. After the rest of Europe was liberated, Spain was left to endure a dictatorship that lasted until Franco's death some 40 years later. Note that in 1953 Eisenhower and Franco signed the Pact of Madrid through which (fascist) Spain received economic aid while the US was allowed to establish military bases on Spanish territory.
The very fact that Franco rose to power and established his fascist government at the very same time the neighboring countries were liberated is a huge indicator that fascism wasn't that much of a problem for the western governments/elites than the threat of a social revolution posed.
While after Europe was rid of the plague of German fascism the socialists/workers in Spain struggled against their own fascist dictator, who was backed by the usual suspects (i.e. a bigger part of the military and the old 'elite') and ignored by all of the allied governments who were just too busy celebrating their "victory" over fascism. If the fighting in WWII had really been for the sake of protecting democracy and fighting fascism the very fact of Franco, being an overt authoritarian fascist ruler, should have made him an enemy, not "neutral"!
This concept was continued by the new superpower to rise after WWII, the US. And there is ample evidence in the events that happened ever since and the situation at this very moment that the socialist movement was seen as a far greater problem than fascism ever was. Just have a look at the history of the countries of Indochina, Iran, Iraq and a host of South American countries during the "Cold" War. You'll see time and again that democratically elected socialist governments were violently disposed followed by an authoritarian/fascist corrupt governments with the support of the US military/intelligence.
During the time Jurassic Park was written some scientists classified Deinonychus antirrhopus as a (big) species of Velociraptor. These dinosaurs were man sized and the raptors in the movie represented pretty well what scientists believed they would look like (e.g. the skull resembled D. antirrhopus, not an oversized Velociraptor mongoliensis). Afaik it was the largest dromaeosaurid (those with the hook claw on the foot) species known until Utahraptor was discovered (more than 2m/7ft tall).
But accurate nomenclature is generally hard (especially when you get down to the species/subspecies level) with animals you can only judge by their appearance (instead of using genetical analysis).
My sentiments exactly. What will prevent Google from becoming evil? The compnay is growing rapidly. The information it possesses of many people are enough to theoretically pinpoint who/where they are, what their political affiliations might be, what they like to do in their spare time etc.etc. - THAT is power! And power corrupts. Maybe not now, maybe the "Google guys" have enough foresight and prudence to guard against their company becoming too evil for now, but things are bound to change in a generation or two.
Animal farm ran very well at the beginning until Napoleon replaced the original "good" leader (Snowball). From then on the rules of Animalism were rewritten and rewritten until it was indistinguishable from the other farms run by (the evil) humans.
I actually only though about parents, improving the genes of their off-spring. While nowadays parents (with certain genetical predispositions) are only able to choose which ("healthy") zygote they want reimplanted not too far in the future it would be possible to redesign the zygote before reimplantation, e.g. to be free of or even resilient against many diseases or to have no deformities - and for a few bucks more to raise their attractiveness by any amount desired, make them more intelligent etc. etc.
We have been doing this stuff with plants for a couple of decades now; we are experimenting with transgene pigs (i.e. replacing/adding certain 'beneficial' genes to a pig's genome) - humans could be next; soon only ethical issues will stand against it. These issues need to be rationalized and solved: what is right, what is wrong?. There are already a lot of scientists who seem to do research for research's sake alone, disregarding ethical issues as unrelated to the concept of research. Furthermore there are presently no universal guidelines on what should and what should not be researched, because the real ethical discussion is in limbo (held back in part due to religious hardliners unable to rationalize and apply logic and thus do not help in the discussion).
I agree. I also find it rather strange that things like these aren't really out there in public discussion. Very soon our scientists will have the means to modify and replace "unwanted" genes. While hardcore religous types may or may not have a point when they say don't mess with our genes/embryos or the creation (though it's arguable that we have done the latter ever since we used our brains to survive), it is not being discussed "what" ethical points these may be. Ethics are there for a reason, but their rules need to be put through rational analysis to determine whether they hold up and have a function or are simply outdated. What needs to be considered as well is that other countries (e.g. Korea or China) don't see the same ethical problems arising when "messing with the creation". So they'll go ahead with research no matter what unless a universal consensus not based on religion is found.
So we need to ask ourselves a few questions. What are the rational implications to eugenics? Is it ok to "just let it happen", just let the scientists do their work in the name of improving our gene pool by finding techniques to eliminate "undesireble genes? WHAT are undesirable genes? Will it lead to a society of morally inept people? Plastic surgery, once decried as weakness of character and senseless vanity of rich people is now becoming main stream in many circles of the high society - who says that this will not happen with 'cosmetic genetics', and furthermore will this not lead to more imbalance and cause strong resentment between those who can afford it and those who can't?
..has nothing to do with it being based on a game. It's based on a comic book (rather mediocre one imho) and it does a great job bringing the pictures and the story to life. Thus it succeeds in its aim and the people mentioned had obviously no idea what they were talking about. Spider-man is also a good example of a movie in which you could freeze at almost any frame and have a beautiful picture that could have been just like that in the comic book - that's skill, that's art!
That being said it seems "300" itself gets misunderstood by quite a few people, ostensibly because it has no accurate disclaimer at the beginning and most people are ignorant about the story and Greek/Persian history in general. It should be clear from viewing the first few scenes, that it is hardly a realistic depiction, but rather a fantastic (obviously biased) and embellished story told by a proud Spartan war veteran. The comic-like style is actually essential in pointing out this very fact.
Klendathu, source of the bug meteor attacks orbits a twin star system whose brutal gravitational forces produce an unlimited supply of bug meteorites in the form of this asteroid belt. To ensure the safety of our solar system Klendathu must be eliminated. Do you want to learn more?
Join the Mobile Infantry and save the world! Service guarantees citizenship!
Such a project would share many of the adventages and problems with sites like Wikipedia. Who will guarantee accuracy? What can be done against vandalism? A hierarchical structure (based on credibility) is required, but how to avoid cronyism and abuse?
Though the anonymity of the net blows up the problem of whether a source can be deemed credible or not it is not unique to the net. If a 'meatspace' reporter screwes up his face will be associated with that screw-up. (Likewise a screen name will become stigmatized.) A good reporter, though, will consistently supply good stories, so his reputation rises and he becomes more popular.
The same should hold true in cyberspace. A color code could be used to indicate the credibility of the author of that particular entry and s/he will get bumped up on the credibility scale as soon as his information can be verified as authentic. This way freelance jounalists could even remain anonymous and use unverifiable/secret sources - as long as they consistently provide truthful stories they get bumped up; in time more people will read them (and check) and in turn everybody will be better informed.
I really hope this sort of alternative independent media becomes mainstream one day, but I fear that many governments will make them illegal to use because of "national security"(tm) reasons.
During the last elections we saw how the anti-war sentiment that has grown over the years have from one day to another given the democrats a rather huge lead in the house. As of now there is nothing to indicate this won't happen in the coming presidential elections as well (the republicans are still pro-war and each of their candidates are simply put quite unpopular).
Though corruption makes no distinction between party lines (if you think democrats are not being bought off by huge corporations just as easily you're fooling yourself) there is also a substantial amount democrats who'd like to grab Halliburton (and to a lesser extend Cheney & friends) by the balls. And seeing as the Iraq war was (from the perspective of Halliburton) merely a risky but profitable investment (though it would have been far more profitable if the Iraqis had "cooperated" as "planned" and helped sell out their country's oil) they would have nothing to fear as long as their republican cronies led by Cheney were still to remain in office.
Seeing as the tides may shift though, they apparently decided to relocate their HQs to a place were US law (and any sort of law enforcement for that matter) could not reach them.
For some background on how the war basically shifted billions of the US tax payers' dollars to Halliburton and other US "no-bid contract" companies while tens of thousands of people lost their lifes violently have a look at the documentary Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers (2006).
Impressive!
Most impressive! Use the force, Luke!
I can't - it's too big!
All right, don't lose your temper. I'll come right back and give you a hand.
Let go, Luke!
Luke, you switched off your targeting computer, what's wrong?
And if he's more of the "kinky" kind we'll also hear:
Now I am the master!
Steady, girl. What's the matter? You smell something?
Now, release your anger!
And of course:
The target area is only two meters wide. It's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system.. Only a precise hit will set up a chain reaction.
What would be the incentive to buy a book then if you get yourself a tablet PC and live in an area with wireless LAN? You could even write your own additional software to make the text display just the way you like it. Unless you are a big fan of the look and feel of books.
The internet has become the new Gutenberg printing press: now copying and distributing information can be done with virtually no effort at all.
This is the crux of the copyright discussion we are having these times. How, in the long run, will the publishers and more importantly the authors make money from their craft? In the past artists and scientists were funded by aristocrats and kings who usually did not have to worry about such expenses. Nowadays in our capitalist privatized systems who will feed our scientists and artists? The common man? He's too much concerned with feeding himself (or buying himself a sports car he can't drive).
So the only logical solution, it seems, is to increase law enforcement, to prevent 'illegal use of information' (how it hurts to write such words) with any means necessary.
This is reminiscent of an article I read about the deepest drilling endeavor ever put forth. While the scientists' educated guess was that the rock material would turn to basalt at around 3-4km in actuality they were confronted with metamorphic rock filled with water! According to the scientists the water might have formed out of O and H atoms "squeezed" out of the surrounding rock and having no way to escape - this would mean it would actually be drinkable water. Furthermore they found large amounts of hydrogen gas contained in the crust which could alleviate some of our energy concerns once we put more effort into hydrogen fuel cell research.
I wonder what else mother earth has in store for us considering we only scratched the surface - the drill hole went down to 12km while the earth's radius is more than 6000km..
Actually both terms apply to the 'derivative work' above, as parody is usually a subset of satire, i.e. parody is used by satire to criticize and ridicule the intended target. Technically both are covered by the fair use clause which protects works used for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.
Of course, if someone does decide to sue it's up to the judge/jury which interpretation(="loop holes") of the clause to apply. (These loop holes are the four sub-points of 107)
I think one way to address the problem of vandalism (or the credibility of data in general) would be to color code entries based primarily on their date of entry. Those sections that stood the test of time will show up in a darker color going toward black to lend its content gravity. This coloring algorithm could also include the 'confidence level' of the author, i.e. a long time member who has made several 'good' entries will get darker colors by default, while an anonymous entry will initially be assigned with a bright red color.
Obviously this should be a toggleable (that a word?) function which can be switched on to quickly see potentially inaccurate data. Imho a function like that would boost the productivity of using Wikipedia quite a bit while at the same time exploiting the advantage it has over paper based encyclopedias.
Thanks for that. After searching around a bit using the Chinese characters I could find quite an informative article for the Economist from just over two years ago describing the situation there.
On my web-search for "Roman looking" Chinese I found this commented slideshow (flash) showing a little girl with blond hair and a local farmer with green eyes.
Well, let's see what the DNA study will uncover.
Btw - Liqian and "legion" does sound similar, but keep in mind that the original Latin pronunciation does differ quite a bit from the contemporary English (and even Italian) pronunciation.
Or let's put it another way: the more "advanced" a society gets the less applicable natural selection becomes. Why? Because societies in first world countries will try to safeguard its citizens against stupidity or any other "lack of fitness". Not only does it protect its citizens against natural hazards, such as wild animals, bad weather, famines etc. but it also strives to protect them from any new threats arising due to the new life style.
The example in this case would be: guy hears about scientists sterilizing a sponge, guy rushes to the microwave in order to replicate the experiment, sponge catches fire, guy frantically jumps around in circles while microwave oven and room catches on fire, this sets off the fire alarm which in turn calls the firefighters, they extinguish the fire, guy sues everybody and their grandma, gets rich and procreates like mad..
We have basically neutralized effects of natural selection on us by assuring the survival and procreation of individuals that would be "less fit". Instead we are subjected mainly to genetic drift, the other effect that determines the gene pool of a population.
The movie Idiocracy actually takes it a step further and postulates that stupidity actually increases the "fitness" of an individual (i.e. a stupid individual is more likely to have children), thus a bunch of generations down the line we'll be living in an "idiocracy" such as the one depicted;) - A funny movie none the less.
Every time you buy some "MADE IN CHINA" shit from WalMart, etc. you help bankroll this type of crap.
Just in the same way as buying "MADE IN THE USA" helps bankroll the war in Iraq plunging the whole region into chaos and thus far causing nearly 60000 (documented) civilian deaths?
Yea, I tend to agree with you - let's buy only products made in Sweden, Mongolia or Antarctica.
True. Maybe there it is possible to switch off unneeded bells and whistles, but I'm berating the fact that with Vista Windows has moved away further from being a productive environment for people who do know the ins and outs about computing. Compared to its predecessors it will require even more time and work to remove all the annoyances and get the OS into a usable state. All the current approach will do is have even more people use Linux or BSD whenever possible, and in turn the industry (e.g. the game developers) might feel pressured to start supporting those operating systems better.
"Dumbing down" the whole system to help grandma deal with security issues while alienating the power users can't be the correct approach. It should be optional to get rid of all these restrictions and confirmation boxes and any other annoyances that turn simple tasks into an obstacle course. - Preferably as a choice when installing the OS.
What makes it so hard to develop operating systems tailored to the needs of the users? Why not create a version, let's call it the "Home" edition that ensures security by enforcing the use of admin passwords, cascading confirmation boxes, ESRB ratings for games, and running all sorts of "security tools" in the background. This version would be used by most of the "home" users who just want a system that works and not rtfm all the time.
Obviously developers, geeks, enthusiasts - let's call them "professional" users get pissed off by this sort of intrusive hand-holding, so why not create a... - oh let's say "Professional" edition of the same OS that by default gives the users freedom about what they want to run and install, lets them decide how to deal with security issues and that only bugs them if really necessary?
Then you will witness an endless flow of words that apparently just won't ebb down: "Yea, hello? Hello? Hello? Yea, can you hear me? Hello? Can you.. Yea. I can hear you. Yea, the reception is lousy. The reception. The RECEPTION. RECEPTION. Yea. Uh-huh. Yep. Yea, I'm in the airplane now. We can now make calls from the plane, ain't that great? Yea, we took off just a couple of minutes ago. We TOOK OFF. Yea, I'm actually calling you from the sky, I'm like god, except that I have a better ring tone [hysterical giggle]. Ah, nice we're getting dinner now [makes hand movement to stewardess (inquiring about his culinary preferences) indicating he's in an important conversation]. Yea. Yep. No, haven't eating for hours, it's great that they serve dinner now, I'm starving. How's the dog? [...]"
A man was brutally killed yesterday aboard flight AA322. Police reports indicate there was no connection to a terrorist plot. According to an eye witness "he was just a really, really annoying guy with a cell phone."
Seeing as the Chomsky hierarchy is usually taught to computer science students nowadays, I'd think Nim Chimsky should have been in that list as well (maybe replacing that dimwitted gorilla..), if anything at least for that geekish name or some of his utterances such as "Play me Nim play!";)
Slashdot Mirror
The US argument is presumably that the copyright owners are in the US, but so what? If I injure a German person while he visits France, should I be extradited to Germany from France? This whole issue just seems bizarre.
;)
I think this needs some clarification. It goes like this: if you commit the crime of pissing off a corporation based in the US you should be "extradited" into the sun. Failing that (due to the still quite inefficient technology nowadays) we'll do the next best thing: 10 years in a US pound-me-in-the-ass prison and additionally a fine of half a million US dollars. That'll teach ya
I'm using both browsers and although Opera starts up faster (even faster than both, my old Mozilla Firebird 0.7 or Mozilla 0.9.x I still have installed) and generally is less of a resource hog I still prefer to use Firefox. Even though I need to restart it due to the memory leak problem (which is mitigated by the built in session manager). Why? One word: customization. If I can not get plug-ins or a Greasemonkey script to do what I want I still can try to delve into the code and "fix" stuff myself.
As a normal browser for Joe Shmoe and his grandma though, I don't really see how Opera could not compete. It is very usable, at least as usable as the other browsers. It's got this new Speed Dial function (when opening a new tab instead of a black screen you'll get a cached thumbnail view of your favorite webpages to click on - real slick) and supports mouse gestures from the get go. It's definitely got the potential to become the main player. The only reason why it is not as popular is because Firefox has been propagated as the main alternative by most people anti-IE/MS, maybe in part because both those browsers stand for such different concepts/philosophies (greedy corporation vs. open source).
Also, Firefox didn't come out of nowhere. Actually quite the contrary: while Netscape (which evolved to Mozilla) was "doing their thing" (i.e. carving more and more market share from Mosaic and other browsers in the early days), whammo! - suddenly there was MS IE pre-installed as the default browser on Windows 95. Suddenly every MS box ran IE because there was no real need to run another browser (and it was faster too). The only edge that Mozilla had and what makes it the favorite alternative browser now is that it was and is open source.
I beg to differ. They may not be worth very much, but there are Congolese Francs, or Franc Congolais as we snobs like to call them. Due to the 9% inflation rate in Congo I'd go for the Djiboutian Franc though, it's pegged to the US dollar, which means that laptop will only cost 31100 Djiboutian Francs - a real bargain! :)
True, the Spanish War ended in 1939 and a lot of the "trouble makers" were executed to quell any future potential for a new uprising. The thing is that a man came into power whose ideology and policies were in line with those of people like Hitler, Stalin, Pinochet or Saddam Hussein, yet no one seemed to care. Instead, (military) interventions were conducted all over the world and all of them ignored, sometimes even supported fascist dictatorships. After the rest of Europe was liberated, Spain was left to endure a dictatorship that lasted until Franco's death some 40 years later. Note that in 1953 Eisenhower and Franco signed the Pact of Madrid through which (fascist) Spain received economic aid while the US was allowed to establish military bases on Spanish territory.
The very fact that Franco rose to power and established his fascist government at the very same time the neighboring countries were liberated is a huge indicator that fascism wasn't that much of a problem for the western governments/elites than the threat of a social revolution posed.
While after Europe was rid of the plague of German fascism the socialists/workers in Spain struggled against their own fascist dictator, who was backed by the usual suspects (i.e. a bigger part of the military and the old 'elite') and ignored by all of the allied governments who were just too busy celebrating their "victory" over fascism. If the fighting in WWII had really been for the sake of protecting democracy and fighting fascism the very fact of Franco, being an overt authoritarian fascist ruler, should have made him an enemy, not "neutral"!
This concept was continued by the new superpower to rise after WWII, the US. And there is ample evidence in the events that happened ever since and the situation at this very moment that the socialist movement was seen as a far greater problem than fascism ever was. Just have a look at the history of the countries of Indochina, Iran, Iraq and a host of South American countries during the "Cold" War. You'll see time and again that democratically elected socialist governments were violently disposed followed by an authoritarian/fascist corrupt governments with the support of the US military/intelligence.
During the time Jurassic Park was written some scientists classified Deinonychus antirrhopus as a (big) species of Velociraptor. These dinosaurs were man sized and the raptors in the movie represented pretty well what scientists believed they would look like (e.g. the skull resembled D. antirrhopus, not an oversized Velociraptor mongoliensis). Afaik it was the largest dromaeosaurid (those with the hook claw on the foot) species known until Utahraptor was discovered (more than 2m/7ft tall).
But accurate nomenclature is generally hard (especially when you get down to the species/subspecies level) with animals you can only judge by their appearance (instead of using genetical analysis).
My sentiments exactly. What will prevent Google from becoming evil? The compnay is growing rapidly. The information it possesses of many people are enough to theoretically pinpoint who/where they are, what their political affiliations might be, what they like to do in their spare time etc.etc. - THAT is power! And power corrupts. Maybe not now, maybe the "Google guys" have enough foresight and prudence to guard against their company becoming too evil for now, but things are bound to change in a generation or two.
Animal farm ran very well at the beginning until Napoleon replaced the original "good" leader (Snowball). From then on the rules of Animalism were rewritten and rewritten until it was indistinguishable from the other farms run by (the evil) humans.
I actually only though about parents, improving the genes of their off-spring. While nowadays parents (with certain genetical predispositions) are only able to choose which ("healthy") zygote they want reimplanted not too far in the future it would be possible to redesign the zygote before reimplantation, e.g. to be free of or even resilient against many diseases or to have no deformities - and for a few bucks more to raise their attractiveness by any amount desired, make them more intelligent etc. etc.
We have been doing this stuff with plants for a couple of decades now; we are experimenting with transgene pigs (i.e. replacing/adding certain 'beneficial' genes to a pig's genome) - humans could be next; soon only ethical issues will stand against it. These issues need to be rationalized and solved: what is right, what is wrong?. There are already a lot of scientists who seem to do research for research's sake alone, disregarding ethical issues as unrelated to the concept of research. Furthermore there are presently no universal guidelines on what should and what should not be researched, because the real ethical discussion is in limbo (held back in part due to religious hardliners unable to rationalize and apply logic and thus do not help in the discussion).
I agree. I also find it rather strange that things like these aren't really out there in public discussion. Very soon our scientists will have the means to modify and replace "unwanted" genes. While hardcore religous types may or may not have a point when they say don't mess with our genes/embryos or the creation (though it's arguable that we have done the latter ever since we used our brains to survive), it is not being discussed "what" ethical points these may be. Ethics are there for a reason, but their rules need to be put through rational analysis to determine whether they hold up and have a function or are simply outdated. What needs to be considered as well is that other countries (e.g. Korea or China) don't see the same ethical problems arising when "messing with the creation". So they'll go ahead with research no matter what unless a universal consensus not based on religion is found.
So we need to ask ourselves a few questions. What are the rational implications to eugenics? Is it ok to "just let it happen", just let the scientists do their work in the name of improving our gene pool by finding techniques to eliminate "undesireble genes? WHAT are undesirable genes? Will it lead to a society of morally inept people? Plastic surgery, once decried as weakness of character and senseless vanity of rich people is now becoming main stream in many circles of the high society - who says that this will not happen with 'cosmetic genetics', and furthermore will this not lead to more imbalance and cause strong resentment between those who can afford it and those who can't?
..has nothing to do with it being based on a game. It's based on a comic book (rather mediocre one imho) and it does a great job bringing the pictures and the story to life. Thus it succeeds in its aim and the people mentioned had obviously no idea what they were talking about. Spider-man is also a good example of a movie in which you could freeze at almost any frame and have a beautiful picture that could have been just like that in the comic book - that's skill, that's art!
That being said it seems "300" itself gets misunderstood by quite a few people, ostensibly because it has no accurate disclaimer at the beginning and most people are ignorant about the story and Greek/Persian history in general. It should be clear from viewing the first few scenes, that it is hardly a realistic depiction, but rather a fantastic (obviously biased) and embellished story told by a proud Spartan war veteran. The comic-like style is actually essential in pointing out this very fact.
Klendathu, source of the bug meteor attacks orbits a twin star system whose brutal gravitational forces produce an unlimited supply of bug meteorites in the form of this asteroid belt. To ensure the safety of our solar system Klendathu must be eliminated. Do you want to learn more?
Join the Mobile Infantry and save the world! Service guarantees citizenship!
Such a project would share many of the adventages and problems with sites like Wikipedia. Who will guarantee accuracy? What can be done against vandalism? A hierarchical structure (based on credibility) is required, but how to avoid cronyism and abuse?
Though the anonymity of the net blows up the problem of whether a source can be deemed credible or not it is not unique to the net. If a 'meatspace' reporter screwes up his face will be associated with that screw-up. (Likewise a screen name will become stigmatized.) A good reporter, though, will consistently supply good stories, so his reputation rises and he becomes more popular.
The same should hold true in cyberspace. A color code could be used to indicate the credibility of the author of that particular entry and s/he will get bumped up on the credibility scale as soon as his information can be verified as authentic. This way freelance jounalists could even remain anonymous and use unverifiable/secret sources - as long as they consistently provide truthful stories they get bumped up; in time more people will read them (and check) and in turn everybody will be better informed.
I really hope this sort of alternative independent media becomes mainstream one day, but I fear that many governments will make them illegal to use because of "national security"(tm) reasons.
During the last elections we saw how the anti-war sentiment that has grown over the years have from one day to another given the democrats a rather huge lead in the house. As of now there is nothing to indicate this won't happen in the coming presidential elections as well (the republicans are still pro-war and each of their candidates are simply put quite unpopular).
Though corruption makes no distinction between party lines (if you think democrats are not being bought off by huge corporations just as easily you're fooling yourself) there is also a substantial amount democrats who'd like to grab Halliburton (and to a lesser extend Cheney & friends) by the balls. And seeing as the Iraq war was (from the perspective of Halliburton) merely a risky but profitable investment (though it would have been far more profitable if the Iraqis had "cooperated" as "planned" and helped sell out their country's oil) they would have nothing to fear as long as their republican cronies led by Cheney were still to remain in office.
Seeing as the tides may shift though, they apparently decided to relocate their HQs to a place were US law (and any sort of law enforcement for that matter) could not reach them.
For some background on how the war basically shifted billions of the US tax payers' dollars to Halliburton and other US "no-bid contract" companies while tens of thousands of people lost their lifes violently have a look at the documentary Iraq for Sale: The War Profiteers (2006).
Impressive!
Most impressive!
Use the force, Luke!
I can't - it's too big!
All right, don't lose your temper. I'll come right back and give you a hand.
Let go, Luke!
Luke, you switched off your targeting computer, what's wrong?
And if he's more of the "kinky" kind we'll also hear:
Now I am the master!
Steady, girl. What's the matter? You smell something?
Now, release your anger!
And of course:
The target area is only two meters wide. It's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system.. Only a precise hit will set up a chain reaction.
What would be the incentive to buy a book then if you get yourself a tablet PC and live in an area with wireless LAN? You could even write your own additional software to make the text display just the way you like it. Unless you are a big fan of the look and feel of books.
The internet has become the new Gutenberg printing press: now copying and distributing information can be done with virtually no effort at all.
This is the crux of the copyright discussion we are having these times. How, in the long run, will the publishers and more importantly the authors make money from their craft? In the past artists and scientists were funded by aristocrats and kings who usually did not have to worry about such expenses. Nowadays in our capitalist privatized systems who will feed our scientists and artists? The common man? He's too much concerned with feeding himself (or buying himself a sports car he can't drive).
So the only logical solution, it seems, is to increase law enforcement, to prevent 'illegal use of information' (how it hurts to write such words) with any means necessary.
This is reminiscent of an article I read about the deepest drilling endeavor ever put forth. While the scientists' educated guess was that the rock material would turn to basalt at around 3-4km in actuality they were confronted with metamorphic rock filled with water! According to the scientists the water might have formed out of O and H atoms "squeezed" out of the surrounding rock and having no way to escape - this would mean it would actually be drinkable water. Furthermore they found large amounts of hydrogen gas contained in the crust which could alleviate some of our energy concerns once we put more effort into hydrogen fuel cell research.
I wonder what else mother earth has in store for us considering we only scratched the surface - the drill hole went down to 12km while the earth's radius is more than 6000km..
Actually both terms apply to the 'derivative work' above, as parody is usually a subset of satire, i.e. parody is used by satire to criticize and ridicule the intended target. Technically both are covered by the fair use clause which protects works used for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research.
Of course, if someone does decide to sue it's up to the judge/jury which interpretation(="loop holes") of the clause to apply. (These loop holes are the four sub-points of 107)
I think one way to address the problem of vandalism (or the credibility of data in general) would be to color code entries based primarily on their date of entry. Those sections that stood the test of time will show up in a darker color going toward black to lend its content gravity. This coloring algorithm could also include the 'confidence level' of the author, i.e. a long time member who has made several 'good' entries will get darker colors by default, while an anonymous entry will initially be assigned with a bright red color.
Obviously this should be a toggleable (that a word?) function which can be switched on to quickly see potentially inaccurate data. Imho a function like that would boost the productivity of using Wikipedia quite a bit while at the same time exploiting the advantage it has over paper based encyclopedias.
Thanks for that. After searching around a bit using the Chinese characters I could find quite an informative article for the Economist from just over two years ago describing the situation there.
On my web-search for "Roman looking" Chinese I found this commented slideshow (flash) showing a little girl with blond hair and a local farmer with green eyes.
Well, let's see what the DNA study will uncover.
Btw - Liqian and "legion" does sound similar, but keep in mind that the original Latin pronunciation does differ quite a bit from the contemporary English (and even Italian) pronunciation.
Or let's put it another way: the more "advanced" a society gets the less applicable natural selection becomes. Why? Because societies in first world countries will try to safeguard its citizens against stupidity or any other "lack of fitness". Not only does it protect its citizens against natural hazards, such as wild animals, bad weather, famines etc. but it also strives to protect them from any new threats arising due to the new life style.
;) - A funny movie none the less.
The example in this case would be: guy hears about scientists sterilizing a sponge, guy rushes to the microwave in order to replicate the experiment, sponge catches fire, guy frantically jumps around in circles while microwave oven and room catches on fire, this sets off the fire alarm which in turn calls the firefighters, they extinguish the fire, guy sues everybody and their grandma, gets rich and procreates like mad..
We have basically neutralized effects of natural selection on us by assuring the survival and procreation of individuals that would be "less fit". Instead we are subjected mainly to genetic drift, the other effect that determines the gene pool of a population.
The movie Idiocracy actually takes it a step further and postulates that stupidity actually increases the "fitness" of an individual (i.e. a stupid individual is more likely to have children), thus a bunch of generations down the line we'll be living in an "idiocracy" such as the one depicted
Every time you buy some "MADE IN CHINA" shit from WalMart, etc. you help bankroll this type of crap.
Just in the same way as buying "MADE IN THE USA" helps bankroll the war in Iraq plunging the whole region into chaos and thus far causing nearly 60000 (documented) civilian deaths?
Yea, I tend to agree with you - let's buy only products made in Sweden, Mongolia or Antarctica.
True. Maybe there it is possible to switch off unneeded bells and whistles, but I'm berating the fact that with Vista Windows has moved away further from being a productive environment for people who do know the ins and outs about computing. Compared to its predecessors it will require even more time and work to remove all the annoyances and get the OS into a usable state. All the current approach will do is have even more people use Linux or BSD whenever possible, and in turn the industry (e.g. the game developers) might feel pressured to start supporting those operating systems better.
"Dumbing down" the whole system to help grandma deal with security issues while alienating the power users can't be the correct approach. It should be optional to get rid of all these restrictions and confirmation boxes and any other annoyances that turn simple tasks into an obstacle course. - Preferably as a choice when installing the OS.
What makes it so hard to develop operating systems tailored to the needs of the users? Why not create a version, let's call it the "Home" edition that ensures security by enforcing the use of admin passwords, cascading confirmation boxes, ESRB ratings for games, and running all sorts of "security tools" in the background. This version would be used by most of the "home" users who just want a system that works and not rtfm all the time.
Obviously developers, geeks, enthusiasts - let's call them "professional" users get pissed off by this sort of intrusive hand-holding, so why not create a... - oh let's say "Professional" edition of the same OS that by default gives the users freedom about what they want to run and install, lets them decide how to deal with security issues and that only bugs them if really necessary?
Seeing as the Chomsky hierarchy is usually taught to computer science students nowadays, I'd think Nim Chimsky should have been in that list as well (maybe replacing that dimwitted gorilla..), if anything at least for that geekish name or some of his utterances such as "Play me Nim play!" ;)