Van Der Waals happens on extremely small scales due to induced dipole-dipole interactions between molecules. I believe it is not as random as the casimir effect, but you're right in that net result is the same: attraction.
He wasn't her ex at the time. Also, as legally defined by many societies, the ring takes precedent over blood ties. If you don't agree with that, get a living will before you get your marriage license. Both are legal documents, and this is purely a matter of law. Many people have found more fulfillment in their own nuclear families through marriage than they had through their blood relatives... so it can go either way. There is nothing "tragic" about it.
Right on man, I agree with you completely. Having the most to gain, sometimes people in the lowest rungs have better financial discipline than wealthier folk, as a matter of necessity.
As some one who comes from a 3rd world country, I lack too much sympathy for your sarcastic argument (if you were to carry your line of thought further, you should be talking about the "deadbeats" from the 3rd world who make the shoes you're wearing). As far as I'm concerned, everybody in the western world SHOULD BE THANKFUL THAT THEY EVEN HAVE THEIR JOBS. So ya, be happy you're alive and pay your fucking bills on time. Living "paycheck to paycheck" is a way of life for the majority of the world's population. Living on credit/in debt is way too popular in the US. It stems from the age-old desire to live beyond your means, the total lack of any discipline to save up for rainy days and rough patches. It's unfortunately all too true that some people have been dealt the bad cards. But it's also too true that many people do not have the personal financial responsibility that they should. My parents came to the US with next to nothing. We lived 5 people to a 1 br apartment for several years before saving up enough to get a bigger place. They put their kids through school, and having given them an ethical and moral code that would let them do well in school, the kids did well enough to get some scholarships, some loans, to get through college and be quite successful.
It saddens me that people in a great country such as this can still make excuses about everything. So ya, fucking deadbeats is exactly what I think.
Maybe you're right legally, whatever...TV seems like a gray area. There's probably some rule about rebroadcasting. Morally, you can take your high and mighty attitude and shove it. I've paid my $40+ monthly to the cable monopoly. Setting my DVR or getting it off a torrent, I couldn't care less. Whatever points you want to make about it are legal technicalities that yes, could get potentially be troubling. What's more troubling, though, is your attitude, as illustrated by your use of the word "steal". It must be nice to be naive like you and assume everything in the law is about fair and just and therefore anything "most likely illegal" is morally wrong. I guess some people are OK with enabling the MAFIAA companies to buy legislation to screw over the consumers. I don't know where you get off preaching to people here.
I often like to start downloading TV shows as soon as they come out. I'm usually at work late or will be going out many evenings, but it's nice to get home and find that the TV show you missed a couple of hours ago is just finished downloading. I'm not that familiar with the uTorrent features, but I'd be interested in anything that helped me pick and start a torrent manually. There are often many versions of a particular piece of media, and I don't want to get the wrong one. So if I could take a minute out of whatever I was doing away from home to search for and start a torrent that may have just been released a few minutes ago (usually shortly after the TV program finished airing in its earliest time zone), this would be be worthwhile for me.
I posted this response in this thread 4 hours before your snooty reply. Read the whole fucking thread "RTWFT" before shooting your mouth off:
Yes, I read the article too. Do you have something constructive to add or are you just going to mock? 10-20g is what they have to work with so far because it is what they needed. If they can bring that down to 5g with the use of thrusters and parachutes, this will be feasable. Hell, the "sky crane" is already in the works to gently land the larger Mars Science Laboratory, see the animation (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/gallery/videos.html# MSL_EDL). Don't be fooled into thinking some kind of newfangled technology will have to be discovered to be able to land on Mars. This problem will be solved by clever application of current technology. Even the donut shaped airbraking mechanism they talk about is basically just a dynamic parachute.
Yes, I read the article too. Do you have something constructive to add or are you just going to mock? 10-20g is what they have to work with so far because it is what they needed. If they can bring that down to 5g with the use of thrusters and parachutes, this will be feasable. Hell, the "sky crane" is already in the works to gently land the larger Mars Science Laboratory, see the animation (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/gallery/videos.html# MSL_EDL). Don't be fooled into thinking some kind of newfangled technology will have to be discovered to be able to land on Mars. This problem will be solved by clever application of current technology. Even the donut shaped airbraking mechanism they talk about is basically just a dynamic parachute.
There should be an explicit right-to-pirate in Canada... a "license to copy and share media" if you will. If you're forcing people to essentially pay for something, they should at least be free to go about acquiring it.
...for OBVIOUS reasons? This is not so obvious to me. It will obviously feel kind of funky, but some of the amusement park rides out there are pretty brutal already. Now, I know you can't just drop them like pathfinder, but the last two rovers were quite big and complex, and NASA didn't exactly want them bouncing around all over Mars -- I'm not at all convinced humans couldn't survive that, especially in combination with a partially powered descent and parachutes. At the least we should be able to model this computationally, if not test it directly, even on Earth.
...it's completely INVALID (no "executive order" can overrule established law, let alone the bill of rights). What I can't figure out is why is the administration even bothering with this? Where the rights of US citizens are concerned, if the SecTres were to actually seize (or freeze) the assets of a citizen without a court order, dozens of legal organizations would leap at the chance to take it all the way to the supreme court. Although I don't agree with most of the supreme court's recent decisions, I think that if they really are as strict at interpreting the constitution as they claim to be, there is no way this would pass as constitutional. Although, Scalito and Roberts seem to be deferring to executive priveledge at every opportunity, so it is still sort of frightening nonetheless. My guess is this will be narrowly targeted towards non-citizens, either resident aliens or visa holders, who are associated with Islamic charities. It is already illegal to contribute to terrorism, but now the government can act without any evidence at all.
--- Welcome to another edition of... Smells Like Republicans! the Orwellian Special!
What you're saying is quite true. In fact, they don't do too much about gun control either. I agree that doesn't give the impression of political neutrality, but they do have a strong privacy theme going on. Also the tobacco and gun lobby mechanism is extremely well funded. They do not need any sort of help from the ACLU. The smoking issue, though, is much more multifaceted. I would staunchly oppose a ban on personal smoking, but you have to admit that there's practically no doubt that second-hand smoke is dangerous. There is no "civil liberty" that gives you the right to harm someone else. Just because it is on private property does not make it OK. You cannot stab me on private property and get away with it. Why the hell should you be allowed to kill me slowly with smoking?
lol nice signature, though when there's only the two fat girls in the bar (win and mac) and one retard cripple (linux), i'll take the 2nd fattest girl any day of the week.
Touche -- I can't agree with everything they do, certainly. I've thought about this a lot as well, and at some point I just decided that even though they are too eager about some things, overall it's good to have a force such as this to keep the checks and balances.
Those decisions sided against gun control near schools, a favorite of the conservatives (oh right, Columbine happened because of all the homosexuals and feminists), and also against prosecuting rapists. Wow, those are some feel-good decisions right there, let me tell ya. Too bad your heroes apparently lost their "balls" when it came standing up to CURRENT federal government. Oh wait, that's right, O'Connor is gone now and there's a solid 5-justice far-right majority. If you were really interested in limits on the federal governments rights, you'd have paid more attention to the decisions from the recently closed session of the supreme court, where the same 5 right wing nutbags sided with the administration over and over again. Oh yeah, and they overruled the states that fought for integrated schools. A recent federal court just threw out the illegal wiretapping suit brought in part by the ACLU. It won't even make it to the supreme court, but I really hope you weigh in on that. Surely you realize they 5 nutjobs will side with Bush on that, just like they have been more and more recently to legitimize every executive branch power grab that got challenged. A little catching up on current events would do you some good.
Our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves. I think you'd be happier in 17th century England, they'd totally agree with you, none of this "bill of rights" bullshit, eh?...
Oh, yeah, and personally, I'm not at all for the 2nd amendment. Let's do away with that whole right to guns thing, eh? But you wouldn't be for that would you? That one fits well with your right wing ideology.
How about the 7th amendment... give me a break... right to a jury trial for any matter over $20?? What a waste of the judicial system.
How about amendment 8? Don't you republicans favor the death penalty? That seems pretty cruel, if you ask me. But hey, what do I know. Oh, yeah, I know the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Maybe you should look it up. It must be so nice being perfect.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
For those who think they're safe from all this, or that all this privacy "nonsense" doesn't affect them because they've got nothing to hide...
One of the reasons I admire the ACLU is that they stick up for the privacy even of insane druggie assholes like Rush Limbaugh. For all those Republicans who think this is some sort of liberal propaganda, keep this up -- in the totalitarian state where the neocon policies are taking us, it won't matter too much what your political affiliations are.
What I can't stand is the whole "two wrongs make a right" thinking of this administration's unconditional supporters. When are people going to understand that EVERY ADMINISTRATION should be held to high standards, especially in this area of ideological interference with supposedly independent branches of government. Philosophically, this ideal is what separates our democracy from totalitarian governments, and it is incredibly important. I think any objective observer would find massive abuses of the noninterference ideal from this administration. As a scientist (casually associated with major US and international societies in biology), I can tell you there are few of us who are comfortable with this administration's constant interference with science. Frankly, this is the opinion that should matter the most (meritocracy), not the constant pundit rants about how "clinton did it too! clinton did it too!" For one, the crap that happened under Clinton was disorganized at best, not some concerted effort such as that taking place by the neocons. It seems lately every government institute comes under pressure from political ideology now -- the EPA, the attorney general, NIH, and now the surgeon general's office. In the end though, I can't stand Tony Snow constantly dodging questions by saying Clinton did it too as if that makes everything ok.
Having work in biology research, I can tell you there's no such thing as a "healthy, non-toxic" natural compound when you're talking about the kinds of doses and enrichment they are. They are using highly enriched maslinic acid for their research, not just olive oil off the shelf. For example, vitamin C will kill you at high enough doses too. I'm sure they must have done the toxicity tests on other animals first -- no reputable medical establishment would just let you inject random promising drugs into people, one would hope. If I wanted to study honey as a remedy for colds, yes, one could start with a "safe" amount of honey that a normal person might consume in a well-controlled trial. But this is comparing apples and oranges... you can normally eat honey, and a small amount is not likely to hurt you. Nobody *normally* gets extract from dry olive-pomace oil injected into their bloodstream.
Slashdot Mirror
This is possibly OK if people get discounts or refunds for good health scores. Otherwise, it's just another way to rip people off.
Van Der Waals happens on extremely small scales due to induced dipole-dipole interactions between molecules. I believe it is not as random as the casimir effect, but you're right in that net result is the same: attraction.
He wasn't her ex at the time. Also, as legally defined by many societies, the ring takes precedent over blood ties. If you don't agree with that, get a living will before you get your marriage license. Both are legal documents, and this is purely a matter of law. Many people have found more fulfillment in their own nuclear families through marriage than they had through their blood relatives... so it can go either way. There is nothing "tragic" about it.
last I heard, Maine and Los Angeles were on the same continent.
Right on man, I agree with you completely. Having the most to gain, sometimes people in the lowest rungs have better financial discipline than wealthier folk, as a matter of necessity.
It saddens me that people in a great country such as this can still make excuses about everything. So ya, fucking deadbeats is exactly what I think.
Maybe you're right legally, whatever...TV seems like a gray area. There's probably some rule about rebroadcasting. Morally, you can take your high and mighty attitude and shove it. I've paid my $40+ monthly to the cable monopoly. Setting my DVR or getting it off a torrent, I couldn't care less. Whatever points you want to make about it are legal technicalities that yes, could get potentially be troubling. What's more troubling, though, is your attitude, as illustrated by your use of the word "steal". It must be nice to be naive like you and assume everything in the law is about fair and just and therefore anything "most likely illegal" is morally wrong. I guess some people are OK with enabling the MAFIAA companies to buy legislation to screw over the consumers. I don't know where you get off preaching to people here.
I often like to start downloading TV shows as soon as they come out. I'm usually at work late or will be going out many evenings, but it's nice to get home and find that the TV show you missed a couple of hours ago is just finished downloading. I'm not that familiar with the uTorrent features, but I'd be interested in anything that helped me pick and start a torrent manually. There are often many versions of a particular piece of media, and I don't want to get the wrong one. So if I could take a minute out of whatever I was doing away from home to search for and start a torrent that may have just been released a few minutes ago (usually shortly after the TV program finished airing in its earliest time zone), this would be be worthwhile for me.
Smells Like Republicans! The "Science Schmience" Special!
Thank you for posting this. nightcats & kdawson - you are stupid douchebags for posting an article you have to pay to read.
Yes, I read the article too. Do you have something constructive to add or are you just going to mock? 10-20g is what they have to work with so far because it is what they needed. If they can bring that down to 5g with the use of thrusters and parachutes, this will be feasable. Hell, the "sky crane" is already in the works to gently land the larger Mars Science Laboratory, see the animation (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/gallery/videos.html
Yes, I read the article too. Do you have something constructive to add or are you just going to mock? 10-20g is what they have to work with so far because it is what they needed. If they can bring that down to 5g with the use of thrusters and parachutes, this will be feasable. Hell, the "sky crane" is already in the works to gently land the larger Mars Science Laboratory, see the animation (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/msl/gallery/videos.html# MSL_EDL). Don't be fooled into thinking some kind of newfangled technology will have to be discovered to be able to land on Mars. This problem will be solved by clever application of current technology. Even the donut shaped airbraking mechanism they talk about is basically just a dynamic parachute.
There should be an explicit right-to-pirate in Canada... a "license to copy and share media" if you will. If you're forcing people to essentially pay for something, they should at least be free to go about acquiring it.
...for OBVIOUS reasons? This is not so obvious to me. It will obviously feel kind of funky, but some of the amusement park rides out there are pretty brutal already. Now, I know you can't just drop them like pathfinder, but the last two rovers were quite big and complex, and NASA didn't exactly want them bouncing around all over Mars -- I'm not at all convinced humans couldn't survive that, especially in combination with a partially powered descent and parachutes. At the least we should be able to model this computationally, if not test it directly, even on Earth.
---
Welcome to another edition of... Smells Like Republicans!
the Orwellian Special!
What you're saying is quite true. In fact, they don't do too much about gun control either. I agree that doesn't give the impression of political neutrality, but they do have a strong privacy theme going on. Also the tobacco and gun lobby mechanism is extremely well funded. They do not need any sort of help from the ACLU. The smoking issue, though, is much more multifaceted. I would staunchly oppose a ban on personal smoking, but you have to admit that there's practically no doubt that second-hand smoke is dangerous. There is no "civil liberty" that gives you the right to harm someone else. Just because it is on private property does not make it OK. You cannot stab me on private property and get away with it. Why the hell should you be allowed to kill me slowly with smoking?
Smells Like Republicans (the vote-rigging special!)
lol nice signature, though when there's only the two fat girls in the bar (win and mac) and one retard cripple (linux), i'll take the 2nd fattest girl any day of the week.
Touche -- I can't agree with everything they do, certainly. I've thought about this a lot as well, and at some point I just decided that even though they are too eager about some things, overall it's good to have a force such as this to keep the checks and balances.
Those decisions sided against gun control near schools, a favorite of the conservatives (oh right, Columbine happened because of all the homosexuals and feminists), and also against prosecuting rapists. Wow, those are some feel-good decisions right there, let me tell ya. Too bad your heroes apparently lost their "balls" when it came standing up to CURRENT federal government. Oh wait, that's right, O'Connor is gone now and there's a solid 5-justice far-right majority. If you were really interested in limits on the federal governments rights, you'd have paid more attention to the decisions from the recently closed session of the supreme court, where the same 5 right wing nutbags sided with the administration over and over again. Oh yeah, and they overruled the states that fought for integrated schools. A recent federal court just threw out the illegal wiretapping suit brought in part by the ACLU. It won't even make it to the supreme court, but I really hope you weigh in on that. Surely you realize they 5 nutjobs will side with Bush on that, just like they have been more and more recently to legitimize every executive branch power grab that got challenged. A little catching up on current events would do you some good.
It's called "illegal".
Our founding fathers are rolling over in their graves. I think you'd be happier in 17th century England, they'd totally agree with you, none of this "bill of rights" bullshit, eh?...
Oh, yeah, and personally, I'm not at all for the 2nd amendment. Let's do away with that whole right to guns thing, eh? But you wouldn't be for that would you? That one fits well with your right wing ideology.
How about the 7th amendment... give me a break... right to a jury trial for any matter over $20?? What a waste of the judicial system.
How about amendment 8? Don't you republicans favor the death penalty? That seems pretty cruel, if you ask me. But hey, what do I know. Oh, yeah, I know the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION. Maybe you should look it up. It must be so nice being perfect.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
For those who think they're safe from all this, or that all this privacy "nonsense" doesn't affect them because they've got nothing to hide...
One of the reasons I admire the ACLU is that they stick up for the privacy even of insane druggie assholes like Rush Limbaugh. For all those Republicans who think this is some sort of liberal propaganda, keep this up -- in the totalitarian state where the neocon policies are taking us, it won't matter too much what your political affiliations are.
What I can't stand is the whole "two wrongs make a right" thinking of this administration's unconditional supporters. When are people going to understand that EVERY ADMINISTRATION should be held to high standards, especially in this area of ideological interference with supposedly independent branches of government. Philosophically, this ideal is what separates our democracy from totalitarian governments, and it is incredibly important. I think any objective observer would find massive abuses of the noninterference ideal from this administration. As a scientist (casually associated with major US and international societies in biology), I can tell you there are few of us who are comfortable with this administration's constant interference with science. Frankly, this is the opinion that should matter the most (meritocracy), not the constant pundit rants about how "clinton did it too! clinton did it too!" For one, the crap that happened under Clinton was disorganized at best, not some concerted effort such as that taking place by the neocons. It seems lately every government institute comes under pressure from political ideology now -- the EPA, the attorney general, NIH, and now the surgeon general's office. In the end though, I can't stand Tony Snow constantly dodging questions by saying Clinton did it too as if that makes everything ok.
Having work in biology research, I can tell you there's no such thing as a "healthy, non-toxic" natural compound when you're talking about the kinds of doses and enrichment they are. They are using highly enriched maslinic acid for their research, not just olive oil off the shelf. For example, vitamin C will kill you at high enough doses too. I'm sure they must have done the toxicity tests on other animals first -- no reputable medical establishment would just let you inject random promising drugs into people, one would hope. If I wanted to study honey as a remedy for colds, yes, one could start with a "safe" amount of honey that a normal person might consume in a well-controlled trial. But this is comparing apples and oranges... you can normally eat honey, and a small amount is not likely to hurt you. Nobody *normally* gets extract from dry olive-pomace oil injected into their bloodstream.