I tend to think some drugs (definitely not all) might be allowable. For instance, I think it's be reasonable to allow EPO while at the same time reducing the hemoglobin limit allowed. You bust the limit naturally? Just take some drugs to reduce your level. The result is that you completely factor this out and it might even be safer than it was. All that is assuming EPO has no side effect, which I *think* is the case.
How soon before even teaching this kind of skill, even in the name of security, will require special licensing, background checks, and any other array of "Security Theater" tactics brought forth by the Department of Homeland Security?
Actually, the background check should be for students, not teachers....contract killed by McAfee or Symantec
Just the opposite. He will likely both the future McAfee/Symantec employees and the new virus writers that will keep them in business.
To continue on what you're saying, I think it would be interesting to measure whether there's a correlation between road rage and the size of the metal box.
Math in OpenOffice is even uglier than in MS Word. I consider this quite an achievement considering how ugly Word is to begin with. AFAIK, LaTeX is still the only way to get decent-looking maths.
I came across Scholarpedia a while ago and noted some non-free license issues. Now, it seems to be fine, so I'm not sure whether they changed the license or whether I just made stuff up that wasn't there.
Very often, these numbers are obtained through wild estimations that can be "adjusted" to give pretty much anything you want. Through poor methodology and tiny sample sizes, you could probably end up with either 100/wk or 12,000/wk depending how what you prefer.
And how is learning a new language that bad? BTW, if your job has to do with science or engineering, then you can often get away with just knowing English.
The Liberals and the NDP don't want anything to do with helping him please Bush.
Except the Liberals are shit-scared of forcing elections so they don't dare block any bill -- and Harper knows it. So in practice, it's pretty much like a majority government, and it sucks.
Sad part is, I'd move to another country if I knew of any better ones out there. Anyone know of a mostly English-speaking country that doesn't walk all over its citizens' rights? I know the UK is right out, and I hear Australia is pretty bad too.
Australia's got a bit better now that Howard got booted out. Canada used to be better before Stephen "whatever you say Mr. Bush" Harper became PM. Still, none of those where ever remotely as bad as the US in terms of being police states. Don't know how UK compares.
I've seen one of my papers take one year to get reviewed. I know someone who's paper took two years and came back from peer review with "good idea, but the work is a bit old". So yes, it happens. Not always, but frequently enough that it's a problem.
And how long did the previous train take. If it took 8 hours, then maybe it's the reason it didn't succeed. That being said, if you're going to build a maglev train, you might as well build it between two major cities, like New York to Washington.
I'm a Canadian who spent three years in Australia and I'm returning to Canada next month. I actually found a job back in Canada by applying online and doing interviews over the phone. I don't really know much about any "hoops" you have to go through in Australia, but can't think of anything really important to know when applying in Canada (OK, can't say for anything other than Montreal). I've pretty much dealt directly with companies, so I don't know how it is with recruiters.
There was/is absolutely no conspiracy to deny customers their service - on an individual-call level, Dell demands high quality performance from its techs. However, there was/is systemic disregard for the techs, their expertise, and their workloads, which led to, naturally, a shortage of highly qualified individuals (meaning that in many cases, Dell could only hire marginally qualified people, like myself), which exacerbated hold times as well as lowered the quality of service once the customer got a technician to talk to.
Well, that's exactly how you do it. If Dell wants to "deny customers their service", it's much simpler to make sure customer service is under-staffed than to tell technicians to give bad service (not to mention that it's also cheaper). This goes far further than Dell. If the a CEO/manager/whatever wants a person under him to do something illegal, he can either say it directly (and risk being liable), or they can simply ask for unrealistic outcomes knowing that the only way the person would be able to meet the expectation is by doing something illegal.
The single biggest thing that annoys me with Dell are their laptop batteries. They last on average around 6-9 months, after which they'll hold only 20-30 minutes of charge. To get an idea of what I'm talking about, here are some reviews of their 6-cell and 9-cell batteries. My favorite one is "Pros: It fits in the battery slot. Con: The battery didn't even last a year.":-) The only good point is that with their 1-year guarantee, you're always sure to get two batteries for the price of one.
Unemployment rates aren't very useful for two reasons: when someone just stops looking for a job, the unemployment falls (despite no new job being create) and 2) because if you cut a full-time job and replace it with a poorly-paid part-time job, it doesn't change anything to the rate.
It's a lot more than who pays who. One basic problem is that agents are paid on a percentage of the sale. Let's say a property is worth $500,000 and the commission is 3% to each agent (seller and buyer). The seller's agent knows that if he can get the seller to sell for $450k, he only loses 10% of his commission and he'll make the sale with nearly no effort. Hence, the interest of the seller's agent (in terms of pay/effort) is to make the seller accept any price even if it's low.
On the buyer's side, it's even worse because if the buyer pays more, the agent gets more, so there's clearly no incentive for the buyer's agent to help his client bring the price down *if* the client is buying anyway. In the end, both agents' *only* interest is to get the property sold, no matter what the price and the interests of the clients. It's as simple as that.
The scarcity is created by the anti-child-porn laws, not copyright laws.
That's why I also said it would first have to be legal to *distribute* it. With that *and* the "no copyright" provision (to make sure the producer doesn't "sell" copyright to someone else and whatnot), it makes the scarcity go away, removing any profit the producer can make. The main problem I still see with this approach is that it would make it more likely for someone to accidentally end up seeing these images -- or worse -- seeing minors they know. But in any case, I'm sure the best way to fight the problem is to go after the money.
Here's an idea. You make it legal to both download *and* distribute child porn, while production is still (of course) illegal. Then, you amend copyright laws to make child porn non-copyrightable. The end result? It'll be shared and whatnot and the original producer will not make a dime out of it. That's probably the best way to remove the incentive for producing that (which is the real problem). OK, there's a few other ethical issues, but still I think the focus should be a lot more on the people who produce that crap than it currently is.
Slashdot Mirror
Is it too much to ask that the genetic material be completely error-free?
All my DNA uses Reed-Solomon codes.
I tend to think some drugs (definitely not all) might be allowable. For instance, I think it's be reasonable to allow EPO while at the same time reducing the hemoglobin limit allowed. You bust the limit naturally? Just take some drugs to reduce your level. The result is that you completely factor this out and it might even be safer than it was. All that is assuming EPO has no side effect, which I *think* is the case.
How soon before even teaching this kind of skill, even in the name of security, will require special licensing, background checks, and any other array of "Security Theater" tactics brought forth by the Department of Homeland Security?
Actually, the background check should be for students, not teachers. ...contract killed by McAfee or Symantec
Just the opposite. He will likely both the future McAfee/Symantec employees and the new virus writers that will keep them in business.
To continue on what you're saying, I think it would be interesting to measure whether there's a correlation between road rage and the size of the metal box.
Math in OpenOffice is even uglier than in MS Word. I consider this quite an achievement considering how ugly Word is to begin with. AFAIK, LaTeX is still the only way to get decent-looking maths.
I came across Scholarpedia a while ago and noted some non-free license issues. Now, it seems to be fine, so I'm not sure whether they changed the license or whether I just made stuff up that wasn't there.
Some call it bad luck, some call it extreme lack of vision.
Very often, these numbers are obtained through wild estimations that can be "adjusted" to give pretty much anything you want. Through poor methodology and tiny sample sizes, you could probably end up with either 100/wk or 12,000/wk depending how what you prefer.
Yes, pi is defined to 3.1 at sea level.
Isn't there a problem with silicon isotopes having different weights? You need to specify the exact percentage of each isotope.
GPL Violations is allowed (with author's permission) to break into the boxes of all GPL violators. *That* could be interesting.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
And how is learning a new language that bad? BTW, if your job has to do with science or engineering, then you can often get away with just knowing English.
The Liberals and the NDP don't want anything to do with helping him please Bush.
Except the Liberals are shit-scared of forcing elections so they don't dare block any bill -- and Harper knows it. So in practice, it's pretty much like a majority government, and it sucks.
Sad part is, I'd move to another country if I knew of any better ones out there. Anyone know of a mostly English-speaking country that doesn't walk all over its citizens' rights? I know the UK is right out, and I hear Australia is pretty bad too.
Australia's got a bit better now that Howard got booted out. Canada used to be better before Stephen "whatever you say Mr. Bush" Harper became PM. Still, none of those where ever remotely as bad as the US in terms of being police states. Don't know how UK compares.
I've seen one of my papers take one year to get reviewed. I know someone who's paper took two years and came back from peer review with "good idea, but the work is a bit old". So yes, it happens. Not always, but frequently enough that it's a problem.
And how long did the previous train take. If it took 8 hours, then maybe it's the reason it didn't succeed. That being said, if you're going to build a maglev train, you might as well build it between two major cities, like New York to Washington.
I'm a Canadian who spent three years in Australia and I'm returning to Canada next month. I actually found a job back in Canada by applying online and doing interviews over the phone. I don't really know much about any "hoops" you have to go through in Australia, but can't think of anything really important to know when applying in Canada (OK, can't say for anything other than Montreal). I've pretty much dealt directly with companies, so I don't know how it is with recruiters.
There was/is absolutely no conspiracy to deny customers their service - on an individual-call level, Dell demands high quality performance from its techs. However, there was/is systemic disregard for the techs, their expertise, and their workloads, which led to, naturally, a shortage of highly qualified individuals (meaning that in many cases, Dell could only hire marginally qualified people, like myself), which exacerbated hold times as well as lowered the quality of service once the customer got a technician to talk to.
Well, that's exactly how you do it. If Dell wants to "deny customers their service", it's much simpler to make sure customer service is under-staffed than to tell technicians to give bad service (not to mention that it's also cheaper). This goes far further than Dell. If the a CEO/manager/whatever wants a person under him to do something illegal, he can either say it directly (and risk being liable), or they can simply ask for unrealistic outcomes knowing that the only way the person would be able to meet the expectation is by doing something illegal.
The single biggest thing that annoys me with Dell are their laptop batteries. They last on average around 6-9 months, after which they'll hold only 20-30 minutes of charge. To get an idea of what I'm talking about, here are some reviews of their 6-cell and 9-cell batteries. My favorite one is "Pros: It fits in the battery slot. Con: The battery didn't even last a year." :-) The only good point is that with their 1-year guarantee, you're always sure to get two batteries for the price of one.
Unemployment rates aren't very useful for two reasons: when someone just stops looking for a job, the unemployment falls (despite no new job being create) and 2) because if you cut a full-time job and replace it with a poorly-paid part-time job, it doesn't change anything to the rate.
It's a lot more than who pays who. One basic problem is that agents are paid on a percentage of the sale. Let's say a property is worth $500,000 and the commission is 3% to each agent (seller and buyer). The seller's agent knows that if he can get the seller to sell for $450k, he only loses 10% of his commission and he'll make the sale with nearly no effort. Hence, the interest of the seller's agent (in terms of pay/effort) is to make the seller accept any price even if it's low.
On the buyer's side, it's even worse because if the buyer pays more, the agent gets more, so there's clearly no incentive for the buyer's agent to help his client bring the price down *if* the client is buying anyway. In the end, both agents' *only* interest is to get the property sold, no matter what the price and the interests of the clients. It's as simple as that.
Good idea Wonko!
The scarcity is created by the anti-child-porn laws, not copyright laws.
That's why I also said it would first have to be legal to *distribute* it. With that *and* the "no copyright" provision (to make sure the producer doesn't "sell" copyright to someone else and whatnot), it makes the scarcity go away, removing any profit the producer can make. The main problem I still see with this approach is that it would make it more likely for someone to accidentally end up seeing these images -- or worse -- seeing minors they know. But in any case, I'm sure the best way to fight the problem is to go after the money.
Here's an idea. You make it legal to both download *and* distribute child porn, while production is still (of course) illegal. Then, you amend copyright laws to make child porn non-copyrightable. The end result? It'll be shared and whatnot and the original producer will not make a dime out of it. That's probably the best way to remove the incentive for producing that (which is the real problem). OK, there's a few other ethical issues, but still I think the focus should be a lot more on the people who produce that crap than it currently is.