From the harvard law's professor's page "frame a motion to quash a subpoena from a copyright holder to the university for the identity of a student downloader on grounds of undue burden." So what exactly would be defined as an undue burden? Their request for the student's private information, or their exorbitant damages?
Other organisms show altruism as well. Especially prairie dogs. They have "sentries" who sit around and take turns looking out for predators. This is where the altruism comes in. The sentries will be more likely to sound a warning if the prairie dog in danger is more related to the sentry. Although this seems more like watching out for one's own genes being passed on.
I don't know why but I just can't seem to bring myself to think that this movie is going be anything groundbreakingly good. I've been watching rottentomatoes and the last time I checked the cream of the crop had it at 80%. I'm torn, but I still probably won't see it in theaters. The trailers just show you little enough that that's the reason I'm thinking it's just getting hyped, but hey I might be wrong.
That may be true now, but I am most certainly not exaggerating about crops. The sweeteners that go into just about everything now (high fructose corn syrup) come from GMOs - corn. That was the pull that I was talking about. Instead of either importing sugarcane, or growing it domestically, the farming industry applied pressure for companies to switch to corn syrup, which may be cheap, but in my eyes sugar is the better of the two. Those corn crops which are used for high fructose corn syrup are dangerously genetically similar, and as I mentioned before soy beans are the most genetically similar crop in this country. I was not implying that the livestock in this country has reached that point, just that if they are genetically modified like crops are now, that farmers and breeders may be inclined to purchase those "seeds" that are designed for the traits they want which may discourage diversity. I am hoping that what you described will still be the staple of breeding in the future.
The main cause of concern for the public is a lack of trust for the GMOs just because of the unknown factor. It isn't 'natural' in their eyes and is the source of the skepticism. In the scientific community the cause of concern is more with the growing lack of genetic diversity. It won't take long before 90% of the cattle in this country is genetically indistinguishable. The corn and soy beans in the US is already just about at those levels which is a very big cause for concern. Diseases that evolve to target susceptible crops or animals are just that more heinous. Just for the sake of argument I'll bring up the famous potato blight and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (mad cow) and brucellosis in elk. The former is still going on and is being handled terribly by farmers in those regions (I'll forgo my take on that for now). My point is that with decreased genetic diversity means increased susceptibility to disease which in turn causes them to be more pathogenic, meaning that they evolve to be more harmful and more likely to kill their hosts. I for one would like a more sustainable food source than the cheaper alternative. It's a shame that the farming lobby has more of a pull on what happens in this country than the greater numbers who consume those products.
Or does this apply to you if you happen to have just a hard drive in your belongings, or say if you have a desktop that you need to bring with you if you are staying for an extended period of time? I RTFA and all the references seemed to be at Laptops and their respective hard disks.
I'm a Comca$t subscriber and I believe it was a few weeks after the AP story that I noticed my u/d ratio, of which the highest was probably 1.7, suddenly jumped a couple notches. My downloads were affected, but it was mainly the uploads which were throttled to being basically useless.
I just hope the telecoms don't use a red herring of "but most of that traffic is illegal" to deter the FCC away from the core issue: Net Neutrality.
I'm curious as to how they got that "reported $250,000" figure. I read the part about his spamming activities were meticulously documented, but I'm still not sure where the money came from. Do companies actually pay per referral or per email or what? Who is paying this guy? And shouldn't his backers be getting fined or dragged into this at all?
There are seed stores all over the world, some refrigerated, some not. Most governments do it to prevent the genetic variability of our world's crops from dropping to zero, as well as restoring our crops if there does happen to be a disease outbreak that targets specific species of plants, especially those which are so genetically similar.
So much of the world's cereal crops are dangerously similar, due to the fact that everyone wants GMOs (genetically modified organisms) that are disease resistant, insecticide resistant, drought resistant, or infused with certain genes to deter insects. The downfall to that is the fact that you get practically no variation to select for survivability to future diseases, weeds, and insects, or to withstand pandemics or epidemics of disease.
Last I heard, Mexico banned the use of GMOs for corn farmers so that the huge staple of their diet would be reliable in the future, however since corn is an airborne pollinator some crops had been germinated from US GMO corn crops and were burned. They are pretty strict on that, and I'm just hoping a blight doesn't destroy our corn and soybean crops, the two least genetically variable crops that we grow here.
The only difference between a leftwing commie hippie and who owns the media now is that I think the pinko commie would have a little more respect for multiple viewpoints, whether or not he or she agrees with them. Not that I am for monopolization in any way, but it shouldn't matter whether or not you trust or believe the ruling power. The checks are there for a reason, to make sure that power doesn't go unchecked. There used to be a time when presidents filled their cabinets with dissenting opinions to get a broader scope of influence to make better informed decisions, rather that some buddies you went to school with who would rather kiss your ass than give informed advice. But you do make a good point: Principles, not examples. Safeguards, not circumstances.
Why? Because nothing that these people do affects us EVERY DAY. Thus, they're not important.
Your post alone is a prime example of how little people outside the scientific community know how much their lives are affected by what we do. The water you drink would become non-potable, the electricity you consume would fail to be generated, if you were sick you would have nowhere to go (remember doctors are scientists as well) you would eventually run out of food since chemists and geneticists are responsible for the production of non-organic agriculture these days. Thanks to america for thinking we're basically useless to society.
when do we get our required RFID tags?
I still can't believe that some companies actually require their employees to be surgically implanted with these little tracking devices under the guise of security. Hopefully the precedent that California set will stand, unless of course the Supreme Court tries to take a look at it and decides that our privacy means nothing in terms of die Staatssicherheit (national security).
As much as it seems like a good idea to save people from the danger of hurricanes, I've always dreaded what could come from messing with natural processes. Namely what effect it would have on the El Nino Southern Oscillation. Atmospheric energy has to go somewhere, so one has to ponder just what could come from stopping hurricanes from running their course. In my opinion nothing good has ever come from disrupting natural processes.
I'm all for free speech, but when it incites violence against specific people, ethnic groups, or whatever it may be, that's when it crosses the line. I've posted this before, but about a year ago a there was an incident in Warsaw where a man was beaten and stabbed by some skinheads who got his info off of an anti-socialist website run by neo-nazis that posts photos, addresses, and phone numbers of "antifascist activists" which used to be loacated at www.redwatch.info and now has several domains probably due to some ddos attacks. Those pricks deserve alot worse. It would be nice to see such hate inciting sites banned, but I'm a little wary of possible excessive use of it.
I don't really see it as that controversial. If their research doesn't hold up under peer-review it's their loss, although I am very surprised that Nature is publishing this without it being reviewed. Let's hope it doesn't turn out to be a clone (pardon the pun) of what happened in the faked S. Korean cloning research.
I can't believe that this is a "new" story. I did a research paper on the Yucca Mt. Storage facility's plans and this is exactly what all of the research was putting forward. No matter what you put this waste into, it WILL leak out, and sometimes within a time span of only 10 years. The project supposedly has a 10 thousand year life span, but to me that means that it will radiate into surrounding rock and water tables within that time.
"Radioactive colloids could begin reaching the water table about ten years after use and their rate of travel only increases with time. Geologic structure has a dramatic effect on those rates and is the main problem with the repository."
"The radioactive colloids do not reach the water table until about ten years and reach their maxima at one hundred thousand years at 95%, but reach 50% at only sixty to eighty years for the 100-400nm colloids"
That last one is a paraphrase of a resarch paper which sheds alot of doubt on the project's future.
Apparently you have never actually learned about the intricacies of the complex interactions that all species undergo. Remove one species, another may proliferate, or even go extinct. Your poor grasp of that, and the fact that "Extinctions have happened all throughout the history of the earth, it's what happens over time" only applies to NATURAL EVENTS. Humans building ships and altering/destroying natural habitats isn't a good definition of a natural process such as extinction.
You may not want to admit it, but humans depend on every other living thing on this planet to keep us alive. Whether it is oxygen production, nutrient cycling, or even waste removal, almost every organism has affected your life in one way. So keep crossing those species off your list, since you seem to want them all to go extinct, and see where that leaves you.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course they infiltrated their underground. All it took was their credit card number and SS#.
From the harvard law's professor's page "frame a motion to quash a subpoena from a copyright holder to the university for the identity of a student downloader on grounds of undue burden."
So what exactly would be defined as an undue burden? Their request for the student's private information, or their exorbitant damages?
Other organisms show altruism as well. Especially prairie dogs. They have "sentries" who sit around and take turns looking out for predators. This is where the altruism comes in. The sentries will be more likely to sound a warning if the prairie dog in danger is more related to the sentry. Although this seems more like watching out for one's own genes being passed on.
you hang out in the forest and kill boars
I don't know why but I just can't seem to bring myself to think that this movie is going be anything groundbreakingly good. I've been watching rottentomatoes and the last time I checked the cream of the crop had it at 80%. I'm torn, but I still probably won't see it in theaters. The trailers just show you little enough that that's the reason I'm thinking it's just getting hyped, but hey I might be wrong.
Those scientists might have gotten hit with whatever could be robot poop.
That may be true now, but I am most certainly not exaggerating about crops. The sweeteners that go into just about everything now (high fructose corn syrup) come from GMOs - corn. That was the pull that I was talking about. Instead of either importing sugarcane, or growing it domestically, the farming industry applied pressure for companies to switch to corn syrup, which may be cheap, but in my eyes sugar is the better of the two. Those corn crops which are used for high fructose corn syrup are dangerously genetically similar, and as I mentioned before soy beans are the most genetically similar crop in this country. I was not implying that the livestock in this country has reached that point, just that if they are genetically modified like crops are now, that farmers and breeders may be inclined to purchase those "seeds" that are designed for the traits they want which may discourage diversity. I am hoping that what you described will still be the staple of breeding in the future.
The main cause of concern for the public is a lack of trust for the GMOs just because of the unknown factor. It isn't 'natural' in their eyes and is the source of the skepticism. In the scientific community the cause of concern is more with the growing lack of genetic diversity. It won't take long before 90% of the cattle in this country is genetically indistinguishable. The corn and soy beans in the US is already just about at those levels which is a very big cause for concern. Diseases that evolve to target susceptible crops or animals are just that more heinous. Just for the sake of argument I'll bring up the famous potato blight and bovine spongiform encephalopathy (mad cow) and brucellosis in elk. The former is still going on and is being handled terribly by farmers in those regions (I'll forgo my take on that for now). My point is that with decreased genetic diversity means increased susceptibility to disease which in turn causes them to be more pathogenic, meaning that they evolve to be more harmful and more likely to kill their hosts. I for one would like a more sustainable food source than the cheaper alternative. It's a shame that the farming lobby has more of a pull on what happens in this country than the greater numbers who consume those products.
Good thing I just submitted it at work. Suck on that comcast.
Or does this apply to you if you happen to have just a hard drive in your belongings, or say if you have a desktop that you need to bring with you if you are staying for an extended period of time? I RTFA and all the references seemed to be at Laptops and their respective hard disks.
I'll assume their definition of "The People" is any US citizen who has not ever left its borders.
I'm a Comca$t subscriber and I believe it was a few weeks after the AP story that I noticed my u/d ratio, of which the highest was probably 1.7, suddenly jumped a couple notches. My downloads were affected, but it was mainly the uploads which were throttled to being basically useless. I just hope the telecoms don't use a red herring of "but most of that traffic is illegal" to deter the FCC away from the core issue: Net Neutrality.
I'm curious as to how they got that "reported $250,000" figure. I read the part about his spamming activities were meticulously documented, but I'm still not sure where the money came from. Do companies actually pay per referral or per email or what? Who is paying this guy? And shouldn't his backers be getting fined or dragged into this at all?
There are seed stores all over the world, some refrigerated, some not. Most governments do it to prevent the genetic variability of our world's crops from dropping to zero, as well as restoring our crops if there does happen to be a disease outbreak that targets specific species of plants, especially those which are so genetically similar.
So much of the world's cereal crops are dangerously similar, due to the fact that everyone wants GMOs (genetically modified organisms) that are disease resistant, insecticide resistant, drought resistant, or infused with certain genes to deter insects. The downfall to that is the fact that you get practically no variation to select for survivability to future diseases, weeds, and insects, or to withstand pandemics or epidemics of disease.
Last I heard, Mexico banned the use of GMOs for corn farmers so that the huge staple of their diet would be reliable in the future, however since corn is an airborne pollinator some crops had been germinated from US GMO corn crops and were burned. They are pretty strict on that, and I'm just hoping a blight doesn't destroy our corn and soybean crops, the two least genetically variable crops that we grow here.
The only difference between a leftwing commie hippie and who owns the media now is that I think the pinko commie would have a little more respect for multiple viewpoints, whether or not he or she agrees with them. Not that I am for monopolization in any way, but it shouldn't matter whether or not you trust or believe the ruling power. The checks are there for a reason, to make sure that power doesn't go unchecked. There used to be a time when presidents filled their cabinets with dissenting opinions to get a broader scope of influence to make better informed decisions, rather that some buddies you went to school with who would rather kiss your ass than give informed advice. But you do make a good point: Principles, not examples. Safeguards, not circumstances.
my bad. i guess i read too much into that, plus you were lacking the tag
Why? Because nothing that these people do affects us EVERY DAY. Thus, they're not important. Your post alone is a prime example of how little people outside the scientific community know how much their lives are affected by what we do. The water you drink would become non-potable, the electricity you consume would fail to be generated, if you were sick you would have nowhere to go (remember doctors are scientists as well) you would eventually run out of food since chemists and geneticists are responsible for the production of non-organic agriculture these days. Thanks to america for thinking we're basically useless to society.
when do we get our required RFID tags? I still can't believe that some companies actually require their employees to be surgically implanted with these little tracking devices under the guise of security. Hopefully the precedent that California set will stand, unless of course the Supreme Court tries to take a look at it and decides that our privacy means nothing in terms of die Staatssicherheit (national security).
As much as it seems like a good idea to save people from the danger of hurricanes, I've always dreaded what could come from messing with natural processes. Namely what effect it would have on the El Nino Southern Oscillation. Atmospheric energy has to go somewhere, so one has to ponder just what could come from stopping hurricanes from running their course. In my opinion nothing good has ever come from disrupting natural processes.
I'm all for free speech, but when it incites violence against specific people, ethnic groups, or whatever it may be, that's when it crosses the line. I've posted this before, but about a year ago a there was an incident in Warsaw where a man was beaten and stabbed by some skinheads who got his info off of an anti-socialist website run by neo-nazis that posts photos, addresses, and phone numbers of "antifascist activists" which used to be loacated at www.redwatch.info and now has several domains probably due to some ddos attacks. Those pricks deserve alot worse. It would be nice to see such hate inciting sites banned, but I'm a little wary of possible excessive use of it.
I don't really see it as that controversial. If their research doesn't hold up under peer-review it's their loss, although I am very surprised that Nature is publishing this without it being reviewed. Let's hope it doesn't turn out to be a clone (pardon the pun) of what happened in the faked S. Korean cloning research.
Please for the love of god can everyone stop using the tubes metaphor. It's not a sewer system, contrary to what Senator Ted Stevens thinks.
I can't believe that this is a "new" story. I did a research paper on the Yucca Mt. Storage facility's plans and this is exactly what all of the research was putting forward. No matter what you put this waste into, it WILL leak out, and sometimes within a time span of only 10 years. The project supposedly has a 10 thousand year life span, but to me that means that it will radiate into surrounding rock and water tables within that time. "Radioactive colloids could begin reaching the water table about ten years after use and their rate of travel only increases with time. Geologic structure has a dramatic effect on those rates and is the main problem with the repository." "The radioactive colloids do not reach the water table until about ten years and reach their maxima at one hundred thousand years at 95%, but reach 50% at only sixty to eighty years for the 100-400nm colloids" That last one is a paraphrase of a resarch paper which sheds alot of doubt on the project's future.
Apparently you have never actually learned about the intricacies of the complex interactions that all species undergo. Remove one species, another may proliferate, or even go extinct. Your poor grasp of that, and the fact that "Extinctions have happened all throughout the history of the earth, it's what happens over time" only applies to NATURAL EVENTS. Humans building ships and altering/destroying natural habitats isn't a good definition of a natural process such as extinction. You may not want to admit it, but humans depend on every other living thing on this planet to keep us alive. Whether it is oxygen production, nutrient cycling, or even waste removal, almost every organism has affected your life in one way. So keep crossing those species off your list, since you seem to want them all to go extinct, and see where that leaves you.