You're obliged to comply with a lawful order: true
What constitutes a lawful order? (Honest question; I'd really like to know.) If a cop tells me to cross to the other side of the street is that a lawful order? What if he tells me to hand him my cell phone? What if he tells me to unlock the door to a private building(*) for which they don't have a warrant?
If "lawful order" means "an order to do something that is lawful", then it's pretty broad and would include all of the above. If it's sometime more restrictive, then what is the line?
I am constantly joking around with other lab denizens about fudging stuff, and removing data that doesn't fit the expectations.
Some things are so wrong you shouldn't even joke about them. (Yes, I work in research. No, we don't joke about those things. There are lots of better things to joke about.)
What you are describing is called "work made for hire" and in those cases the employer is considered the author. So for example, developers working for a software company could not come back 35 years later and cause trouble because it would be the software company that is legally considered the author and not the developer.
See 17 USC 101 (definition of what qualifies as "work made for hire") and 17 USC 201(b) (about how "work made for hire" relates to authorship).
This is a guess but we probably don't have the tech to do signal processing at the ~400THz / ~800nm range that LIDAR operates at. After all the ideal antenna length is proportional to the wave length so meter or centimeter wavelengths are manageable, but nanometer antennas would be hard to construct. (I am not a radio engineer. This is only a guess inferred from the physics.)
First, the wikipedia page you reference was the one on Electric Shock not the one on Electrocution.
Second, neither of the statistics you quote specify the source of the electric shock. Are the from contact with a socket? Power lines outside a house? Industrial power cables in a factory? Lightning strike? To know which socket is safer, you would have to restrict ourselves to shocks from a socket.
Finally, the UK statistic you quote only refers to work related deaths so it says nothing about the safety of your sockets at home.
That would work fine if I was trying to memorize handouts but it does nothing to help recall of the lecture. For a visual learner, the process of writing has to occur in parallel with the event we are trying to cement in our memory.
Forbidding notes is discriminatory against visual learners. You may not derive much benefit from the process of writing notes if you are primarily an auditory or tactile learner, but that doesn't justify claiming that everyone else would be better off without notes.
For a visual learner, the process of writing the notes is often more important than whether they are read later. They are a way to organize ideas or anchor them in memory and are not just a recording device.
Your opt-in is written after the main text. So I hasn't seen and comprehended it until after I read your post. I'll see you in the machete pit for writing an incomprehensible (before the fact) opt-in.
I didn't invent this mouse grip technique, but it really helps. The fingers gripping the sides of the mouse(*) should also be in full contact with the mouse pad. That way you can get fine mouse movements just by rolling your gripping fingers left and right. Your gripping fingers are thus anchored by the mousepad and can exert very fine amounts of push on the mouse.
(*) For me these are thumb and pinky, but I suppose you could use thumb and ring finger.
The reason to blame Obama isn't that he caused it, but that he hasn't fixed it. If he doesn't fix it soon, then all his talk of "change" will have just been a bunch of hot air.
Operating under the assumption of each train carrying 400 each trip, it would take 235,000 trips at a $50 fare per passenger.
How many trips a day do you plan for this train to take? As many as 30? It would still take 21.5 years to pay it off. And keep in mind that night-time and non-rush hour trips won't be all that filled. And we still haven't accounted for upkeep costs.
An individual's education is a rival, excludable good. Thus it belongs to the free market.
An educated populace is a non-rival, non-excludable good with a moderate network effect. Thus it belongs to state-run monopolies.
There is another market that exhibits the duality: newspapers. Having an informed populace may be in everyone's interest, but you don't see many government run newspapers (at least in the USA).
On the other hand, I acknowledge that other goods like fire protection exhibit this same double nature, yet are usually public monopolies.
There is likely some other variable or property that would explain the difference between newspapers and fire protection. I don't know what it is (I only took Micro. Econ. 101), but I would love to hear from those who do.
In a free market, the government should interfere no more or less than a referee interferes with a sport. The referee isn't there to determine the score or the plays. He is only there to provide an honest playing field. (This is basic economics that transcends left vs right, conservative vs. liberal.)
Both the IEEE and ACM do this with their journal archives. If you're ISP (e.g. a research university) has paid for access, then you get in for free. Otherwise you need to pay for membership.
(This gets very annoying when I visit family and can't get in. I'm not sure whether I think this is a good or bad thing, but it is annoying.)
It sounds like you would say "ethics" where I would say "ethical or moral code", and you would say "morals" where I would say "ethical or moral belief". However, I would say that there is still a third element in that a codification and a belief are separate from objective truth. We should be cautious of a false dichotomy here as something may not violate either my beliefs or codes, but still be morally wrong. This is the same as in physics where a codification of physical law, a belief about physical law, and the actual physical law are different things. The former two are indirectly or directly subjective (i.e. you can make objective statements about the codification, but the codification is based on a belief and thus contains a subjective element (Plato's cave anyone?)) while the latter is purely objective.
A quick google shows little consistency in the meanings of these terms even among those who draw a distinction. Some sources say ethics is the study of morality. Others say ethics is a system of morality. Still others even reverse the distinction (i.e. Ethics = personal, Morals = public custom).
Given the lack of consensus over ethics versus morals I think it is safer to just use the words "code" and "belief" rather than try to make a distinction that is likely to draw you into a debate over how we want to arbitrarily define words. (It also avoids the false dichotomy I mentioned earlier and prevents the use of "ethics" and "morals" as loaded words for subjectivity.)
Slashdot Mirror
You're obliged to comply with a lawful order: true
What constitutes a lawful order? (Honest question; I'd really like to know.) If a cop tells me to cross to the other side of the street is that a lawful order? What if he tells me to hand him my cell phone? What if he tells me to unlock the door to a private building(*) for which they don't have a warrant?
If "lawful order" means "an order to do something that is lawful", then it's pretty broad and would include all of the above. If it's sometime more restrictive, then what is the line?
(*) I've actually had this happen to me.
I guess that makes Science a virus too!
I am constantly joking around with other lab denizens about fudging stuff, and removing data that doesn't fit the expectations.
Some things are so wrong you shouldn't even joke about them. (Yes, I work in research. No, we don't joke about those things. There are lots of better things to joke about.)
What you are describing is called "work made for hire" and in those cases the employer is considered the author. So for example, developers working for a software company could not come back 35 years later and cause trouble because it would be the software company that is legally considered the author and not the developer.
See 17 USC 101 (definition of what qualifies as "work made for hire") and 17 USC 201(b) (about how "work made for hire" relates to authorship).
This is a guess but we probably don't have the tech to do signal processing at the ~400THz / ~800nm range that LIDAR operates at. After all the ideal antenna length is proportional to the wave length so meter or centimeter wavelengths are manageable, but nanometer antennas would be hard to construct. (I am not a radio engineer. This is only a guess inferred from the physics.)
there's no way to know the mechanical status of the vehicle
the computer often knows about mechanical problems before the driver does
So which is it?
First, the wikipedia page you reference was the one on Electric Shock not the one on Electrocution.
Second, neither of the statistics you quote specify the source of the electric shock. Are the from contact with a socket? Power lines outside a house? Industrial power cables in a factory? Lightning strike? To know which socket is safer, you would have to restrict ourselves to shocks from a socket.
Finally, the UK statistic you quote only refers to work related deaths so it says nothing about the safety of your sockets at home.
He says the amount of carbon dioxide in the diesel exhaust is insignificant compared with the amount given off by microorganisms in the soil.
Wait, does that mean the soil outside my house is giving off more CO2 than my car?
I guess I can stop worrying about how my car is contributing to global warming and start worrying about how much my yard is heating up the planet.
That would work fine if I was trying to memorize handouts but it does nothing to help recall of the lecture. For a visual learner, the process of writing has to occur in parallel with the event we are trying to cement in our memory.
Forbidding notes is discriminatory against visual learners. You may not derive much benefit from the process of writing notes if you are primarily an auditory or tactile learner, but that doesn't justify claiming that everyone else would be better off without notes.
For a visual learner, the process of writing the notes is often more important than whether they are read later. They are a way to organize ideas or anchor them in memory and are not just a recording device.
Build a voltage regulator or something into the battery and there will be no risk of shock.
Same here. I have no clues, but it's not just you.
Your opt-in is written after the main text. So I hasn't seen and comprehended it until after I read your post. I'll see you in the machete pit for writing an incomprehensible (before the fact) opt-in.
At about 5% efficiency, as in the music industry,
Where did you pull that number from? Is that economic efficiency (i.e. percent of buyer/seller surplus) or a completely unrelated form of efficiency?
"When small men cast big shadows, it means that the sun has begun to rise."
There, you happy with the flow now? (Though I agree that at least where I am, the sun is about to set. After all it is 5PM.)
...the parent and grandparent post have said everything that needs to be said.
I didn't invent this mouse grip technique, but it really helps. The fingers gripping the sides of the mouse(*) should also be in full contact with the mouse pad. That way you can get fine mouse movements just by rolling your gripping fingers left and right. Your gripping fingers are thus anchored by the mousepad and can exert very fine amounts of push on the mouse.
(*) For me these are thumb and pinky, but I suppose you could use thumb and ring finger.
The reason to blame Obama isn't that he caused it, but that he hasn't fixed it. If he doesn't fix it soon, then all his talk of "change" will have just been a bunch of hot air.
Operating under the assumption of each train carrying 400 each trip, it would take 235,000 trips at a $50 fare per passenger.
How many trips a day do you plan for this train to take? As many as 30? It would still take 21.5 years to pay it off. And keep in mind that night-time and non-rush hour trips won't be all that filled. And we still haven't accounted for upkeep costs.
An individual's education is a rival, excludable good. Thus it belongs to the free market.
An educated populace is a non-rival, non-excludable good with a moderate network effect. Thus it belongs to state-run monopolies.
There is another market that exhibits the duality: newspapers. Having an informed populace may be in everyone's interest, but you don't see many government run newspapers (at least in the USA).
On the other hand, I acknowledge that other goods like fire protection exhibit this same double nature, yet are usually public monopolies.
There is likely some other variable or property that would explain the difference between newspapers and fire protection. I don't know what it is (I only took Micro. Econ. 101), but I would love to hear from those who do.
Try to contact headquarters one last time. If anyone -- I mean freaking anyone answers, stop here.
You're modded funny, but that item really does capture what this thing was for (i.e. it should only fire if everyone else is already dead).
In a free market, the government should interfere no more or less than a referee interferes with a sport. The referee isn't there to determine the score or the plays. He is only there to provide an honest playing field. (This is basic economics that transcends left vs right, conservative vs. liberal.)
You forgot the big media companies. For example, Time Warner which just so happens to also run a nice little ISP.
Both the IEEE and ACM do this with their journal archives. If you're ISP (e.g. a research university) has paid for access, then you get in for free. Otherwise you need to pay for membership.
(This gets very annoying when I visit family and can't get in. I'm not sure whether I think this is a good or bad thing, but it is annoying.)
It sounds like you would say "ethics" where I would say "ethical or moral code", and you would say "morals" where I would say "ethical or moral belief". However, I would say that there is still a third element in that a codification and a belief are separate from objective truth. We should be cautious of a false dichotomy here as something may not violate either my beliefs or codes, but still be morally wrong. This is the same as in physics where a codification of physical law, a belief about physical law, and the actual physical law are different things. The former two are indirectly or directly subjective (i.e. you can make objective statements about the codification, but the codification is based on a belief and thus contains a subjective element (Plato's cave anyone?)) while the latter is purely objective.
A quick google shows little consistency in the meanings of these terms even among those who draw a distinction. Some sources say ethics is the study of morality. Others say ethics is a system of morality. Still others even reverse the distinction (i.e. Ethics = personal, Morals = public custom).
Given the lack of consensus over ethics versus morals I think it is safer to just use the words "code" and "belief" rather than try to make a distinction that is likely to draw you into a debate over how we want to arbitrarily define words. (It also avoids the false dichotomy I mentioned earlier and prevents the use of "ethics" and "morals" as loaded words for subjectivity.)