Sadly, this is just part of the ongoing effort to deprioritize science in America. Watch for more stories like this, if the media even cover them. The technological edge of the scientific revolution is moving overseas fast.
All the robots would have to do to break the 3 "rules" is declare all humans "illegals" or "animals, then humans would have no rights at all and thus could be hunted and hounded mercilessly.
You ask a fundamental question, that is How much time do we have as a species to prevent fossil=fuel combustion from making planet Earth unihabitablefor humans?
Unfortunately, there are several considerations that make things more dire than many might expect:.
1) in many parts of the world we are rapidly approaching wet-bulb temperatures that are lethal to humans. During the most recent El Nino, temperatues in the region of he Persian Gulf rose to above 140 F for hours at a time. The next El Nino, coupled with additonal warming due to carbon dioxide pollution, will greatly expand this region of temperature lethality and temperatures in excess of 145- 150 Fshould be expected within the next 10 years. Since we are in the early phase of a warming that is exponential in nature given its cause (greenhouse gas accumulation), temperatures will rise far more dramatically than they have up till now in human history
2) the geology and chronology of earlier extreme warming periods indicate that massive sea level rises will occur over the next few centuries, perhpas as much as 5-6 m over the course of 200-400 years time. Given that about 80% of world populations live in or near coastlines, the disruption to human activities will be far larger than most imagine.
3) at the current rate of ocean acidification, most organims that deposit calcium in their exoskeletons will go extinct in the next 200-400 years. This is a big deal, since many of these species such as pteropods, whose popoulations are dramatically declining worldwide are the foudations of marine food chains. Humans rely on between 30-50% of all their protein from the oceans (including meals for growing cattle, pigs, and poultry, growing crops, etc.)., with most fisheries in rapid decline worldwide.
4) with the unexpectedly rapid warming of the Arctic a huge reservoir of carbon currently locked in permafrost is about to be rapidly released. Even though only a fraction of this store may enter the asmosphere or the oceans, the reserve does have the potential to double the current rate of warming within a few hundreds of years time, independent of what humans do in the future to curb their own greenhouse gas production..
Now if you carefully look over all the slashdot comments, made by the presumably techically literate among us, and their likely impact on or relevance to any of he 4 considerations just mentkoned, you can see humanity has a major challenge ahead, if it has any chance of survival beyond the relatively near future.
Like most of these "climate change is nothing to worry about " types, they know virtually nothing about biology and natural systems and just how sensitive they are to even the smallest perturbations. To get an appreciation of this fact, consider the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum. Aside from the modern era, it is the period of most rapid warming in planet Earth's history.
Although it was much less than 1/10 as rapid as the warming being forced by human-induced carbon dioxide pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels, it was sufficient to almost totally change the entire mammal fauna of North America. Althouh the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum lasted for as litle as 2,000 to as much as 20,000 years, humans will, at the current rate of pollution, accomplish the same amount of warming in as little as 300-400 years. To make that worse, Trump and his associates are promising to speed up the warming.by doing everything they possibly can to accelerate it.
Sounds like a great plan. Lets make all roads in America dirt roads so that we can have the smug satisfaction of "putting a blade across it every once in a while".
They don't need to provide "live feeds" the state, local governments can do that for the price of a video camera and someone to operate it. However, they should be required to put it on their network. They can do this quite easily at virtually no cost, simply via software.
They may "own" the wires, but they don't own the right-away. Its time to make them pay more for the right-away. It's time to require that any digging or wiring along a public right-away must add a separate cable to be used by a potential competive cable company that would purchase the cable at a minimum price of 110% of its cost at the time the cable was laid. That way future entrants can enter the market and the original company is guaranteed a minimum of a 10% investment on the cable being laid.
Evidently, you don't want to know how your government works, but I do. Those who are left in the dark are taken advantage of by an army of corporate lobbyists and lawyers constantly advancing corporate (and increasingly foreign) interests in the background, usually with limited public knowledge or opportunity for input. Currently, the cable monopolies pick and choose what government operations they choose to cover and make every effort to make it as boring and uninformative as possible so that they can avoid public scruitiny, while maximizing profit at the expense of the consumer.
Here in WA, there are a few channels reserved for state and local government operations. However, they format needs to be revamped so that they draw more public interest and participation, as well as educate the public as to what is actually going on and what the real issues are.
I sugget that:
1) cable companies be required to broadcast all public meetings and all presentations by all public officials, whether to the public at large or to private parties, such as conventions, etc. If a private party refuses public TV broadcasts of government officials, then the public official should be barred by law from attending, with a substantial penalty for doing so. After all, they did take an oath of office that they would represent the people's interest over their own.
2) for every hour of broadcasting any public meeting or presentation by a pubic official these broadcats should be followed immediately by an additional hour where a panel nominated and elected by rate payers can fully discuss the content of the meeting or presentation, with a spectrum of views reprsented. These panels would then get to ask and answer questions brought up live by viewers. Since the public would get to vote on the composition of such a panels, it would guarantee fair representation of viewpoints and balanced discussion of issues.
Let's make America great again by returning democracy, rather than allowing monopolies and vested interests to control all that we see and hear on privatized monopoly controlled programming.
If you pay as much as I do for Comcast service ($250/month), the day they break up Comcast's government permitted monopoly will indeed be a great day.
We have to keep in mind that like other cable operators, Comcast is essentially a monopoly in the communities that they serve. This being the case, local and state governments have every right to regulate them and impose conditions on their operation. Indeed, indirectly as a taxpayer I provide them access to public right-aways, so I expect that I should get something for my money or be in a position to have another cable company come in and do the job.
I've been tracking their service for a number of years now. There are several things that can be noticed that bear directly on what unregulated monopoloies can get away with.
1) they are increasing the number of channels, but 95% of these are purely advertisment/sales only operations. No programming just sales.
2) their scheduled progamming includes networks that steadily increase the number of commercials per hour without any recourse for the consumer to pay only for the channels used. Thus they get extra advertising dollars at my expense as a consumer.
3) they provide almost no public services for local and state governments and local NGO's and other groups to present alternative views so they heavily censor potentially alternative views in the "market". Likewise, they have almost no truly educational channels, say that teach science, geography, literature, social studies, etc. The few that do have limited input into scheduling or time alotments.
4) They force you to choose viewing plans that provide you no choice, but to pay extra for an incredible number of channels I would never watch. They benefit because it makes it seems they are providing more, but in reality they are merely charging more for useless product. Let those who want to watch the shopping channels pay for the priviledge. As a captive consumer, I should be able to decline paying for them, even when I don't watch them.
5) they are providing less and less quality programming for the "basic service" (ie access to networks) dumbing it down and forcing viewers to pay for "premium" services just to have anything worth watching at all.
6) they give a lot of money as a government monopoly to political candidates that support their vested interest, skewing and disadvantaging public discourse.
I say that the laws governing local cable monopolies need to be revised, so that local governments can establish their own services and develop efforts to insure that every part of the country has true competition in the cable markets. We need to move away from monopolies. If monopolies are essential, then they should be government run monopoloies that taxpayers have a direct voice in how they are run.
It's about time that public utility regulators are replaced with office holders that put some pressure on cable company monopolies to do something other than parasitize their customers. Otherwise,its time to vote out the current crop and replace them with more progressive minded citizens, who actually represent the public rather than the cable company monopolies.
That argument breaks down entirely given the fact that the first 2 or 3 FISA warrents on Carter Page, were initiated several months before the Steele dossier was even prepared. The FISA warrent in question was the 3rd or 4th one approved by the FISA Court. The memo also leaves out numerous accounts tha tthe Steele dossier was intially commissioned by one of the GOP presidential campaigns prior to the Clinton campaign paying to get their hands on it.
This memo reveals that the Trump administrationwill do anything, even destroy the FBI and let a foreign agent go free in an effort to try to discredit the Steele dossier. No wonder Putin thinks he has the upper hand.
Scott Pruitt and Ryan Zinke appear ready to put in a large order as part of their efforts to "improve" public lands.
Evidently, they figure it will be a lot quicker to reach their goals than waiting for timber companies to do clear cutting or just waiting for global warming and pine bark beetles to decimate national forests.
Unfortunately, the facts surrounding the examples you use (Lois Lerner and Bundy ranch) don't actually bear out your thesis. Rather they merely show that with enough Fox News propaganda, when combined with the conspiracy industry can distort the truth out of anything.
The sad part is that now Fox is targeting the military, denying vetrans benefits deserved, targeting the VA for cuts, supporting the defence contractor advertisers over the men and women who actually put their lives on the line to serve. Although it benefits Rupert Murdoch's bottom line, it also does the work of USA's competitors for them. No wonder we are rapidly loosing allies throughout the world and abandoning world leadership to others.
This is precisely the kind of thinking that gets humans into the predicament that we are in. All effort gets placed into being the one, rather than actually solving problems for mutual benefit of all. Sadly, it looks more and more like global warming will take us all, before we as a species figure this out.
It seems to me that you missed the point of having honesty and integrity in their original mission statement and why it was important.
No one is pretending that the NSA isn't a spy agency. Likewise, no one is pretending that spying isn't necessary when there are authoritarian regimes and organizations eager to take advantage of US citizens. The critical issue is what values, goals and aspirations is it spying for and what motivates the spying. Unless the citizenry has confidence in those, we might as well stop spying and give in to our authoritarian adversaries.
A series of middle eastern wars since the Balfour Decrlation created a "jewish homeland", proves that Jews are preety much like everyone else when it comes to pacifism and warmongering. The trick is to find away out of the cycle of violence and put such animosity and hostility behind us, so that we can focus on bigger problems, like keeping planet Earth habitable in the latter half of the 21st century and the 22nd century. Unless this is done, humanity is very unlikely to experience a 23rd century.
What on earth are you talking about? The recent CR just approved will only last until 8 February.
Despite all the hype and bloviating, little progess has been made in actually solving the problems that matter. Take ocean acification for instance. In 300 years at the current rate of acidification, virtually all life in the ocean will disappear. Given that humans get 50% of all their protein from the oceans, this will have profound effects. Indeed, there is already wide spread evidence of this. Oysters are disappearing from the menus everywhere. Pteropods, the base of much of the marine food chain are rapidly declining in abundance. Unfortunately, pretending such problems aren't there and doing nothing about it isn't going to prevent a lifeless ocean.
The WH and Fox News are going all out on the efforts to besmirch government institutions to protect Trump and his foreign allies and advance their politcal adgenda. It used to be that people believed in the rule of law. Now as is evident from Fox News coverage a higher priority is 1) coercive political power and 2) the greed that motivates it.
Abe Lincoln was right. You can fool some of the people all the time.
The sad part is that so far the only approach the US has taken in countering meddling and cybercrime by authoritarian regimes is to become one instead. This is not going to end well, either for demoracy or the rule of law. However, as the old Judy Collins song used to say "you won't know what you have lost until it is gone".
We need to move to a system in which after the first offence. Johns are given a choice: 1) castration and penis removal, 2) life on a small island with others like themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
Sadly, this is just part of the ongoing effort to deprioritize science in America. Watch for more stories like this, if the media even cover them. The technological edge of the scientific revolution is moving overseas fast.
This is the best news I've heard all week. The sooner the GOP goes extinct, the sooner many of the world's and Americans problems will be solved.
One good typhoon and one has to ask, were will the inhabitants go?
All the robots would have to do to break the 3 "rules" is declare all humans "illegals" or "animals, then humans would have no rights at all and thus could be hunted and hounded mercilessly.
You ask a fundamental question, that is How much time do we have as a species to prevent fossil=fuel combustion from making planet Earth unihabitablefor humans?
Unfortunately, there are several considerations that make things more dire than many might expect:.
1) in many parts of the world we are rapidly approaching wet-bulb temperatures that are lethal to humans. During the most recent El Nino, temperatues in the region of he Persian Gulf rose to above 140 F for hours at a time. The next El Nino, coupled with additonal warming due to carbon dioxide pollution, will greatly expand this region of temperature lethality and temperatures in excess of 145- 150 Fshould be expected within the next 10 years. Since we are in the early phase of a warming that is exponential in nature given its cause (greenhouse gas accumulation), temperatures will rise far more dramatically than they have up till now in human history
2) the geology and chronology of earlier extreme warming periods indicate that massive sea level rises will occur over the next few centuries, perhpas as much as 5-6 m over the course of 200-400 years time. Given that about 80% of world populations live in or near coastlines, the disruption to human activities will be far larger than most imagine.
3) at the current rate of ocean acidification, most organims that deposit calcium in their exoskeletons will go extinct in the next 200-400 years. This is a big deal, since many of these species such as pteropods, whose popoulations are dramatically declining worldwide are the foudations of marine food chains. Humans rely on between 30-50% of all their protein from the oceans (including meals for growing cattle, pigs, and poultry, growing crops, etc.)., with most fisheries in rapid decline worldwide.
4) with the unexpectedly rapid warming of the Arctic a huge reservoir of carbon currently locked in permafrost is about to be rapidly released. Even though only a fraction of this store may enter the asmosphere or the oceans, the reserve does have the potential to double the current rate of warming within a few hundreds of years time, independent of what humans do in the future to curb their own greenhouse gas production..
Now if you carefully look over all the slashdot comments, made by the presumably techically literate among us, and their likely impact on or relevance to any of he 4 considerations just mentkoned, you can see humanity has a major challenge ahead, if it has any chance of survival beyond the relatively near future.
Like most of these "climate change is nothing to worry about " types, they know virtually nothing about biology and natural systems and just how sensitive they are to even the smallest perturbations. To get an appreciation of this fact, consider the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum. Aside from the modern era, it is the period of most rapid warming in planet Earth's history.
Although it was much less than 1/10 as rapid as the warming being forced by human-induced carbon dioxide pollution caused by the burning of fossil fuels, it was sufficient to almost totally change the entire mammal fauna of North America. Althouh the Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum lasted for as litle as 2,000 to as much as 20,000 years, humans will, at the current rate of pollution, accomplish the same amount of warming in as little as 300-400 years. To make that worse, Trump and his associates are promising to speed up the warming.by doing everything they possibly can to accelerate it.
The only way to protect yourself is to avoid any clicks or use of the company's products and its website.
Sounds like a great plan. Lets make all roads in America dirt roads so that we can have the smug satisfaction of "putting a blade across it every once in a while".
They don't need to provide "live feeds" the state, local governments can do that for the price of a video camera and someone to operate it. However, they should be required to put it on their network. They can do this quite easily at virtually no cost, simply via software.
They may "own" the wires, but they don't own the right-away. Its time to make them pay more for the right-away. It's time to require that any digging or wiring along a public right-away must add a separate cable to be used by a potential competive cable company that would purchase the cable at a minimum price of 110% of its cost at the time the cable was laid. That way future entrants can enter the market and the original company is guaranteed a minimum of a 10% investment on the cable being laid.
Evidently, you don't want to know how your government works, but I do. Those who are left in the dark are taken advantage of by an army of corporate lobbyists and lawyers constantly advancing corporate (and increasingly foreign) interests in the background, usually with limited public knowledge or opportunity for input. Currently, the cable monopolies pick and choose what government operations they choose to cover and make every effort to make it as boring and uninformative as possible so that they can avoid public scruitiny, while maximizing profit at the expense of the consumer.
Here in WA, there are a few channels reserved for state and local government operations. However, they format needs to be revamped so that they draw more public interest and participation, as well as educate the public as to what is actually going on and what the real issues are.
I sugget that:
1) cable companies be required to broadcast all public meetings and all presentations by all public officials, whether to the public at large or to private parties, such as conventions, etc. If a private party refuses public TV broadcasts of government officials, then the public official should be barred by law from attending, with a substantial penalty for doing so. After all, they did take an oath of office that they would represent the people's interest over their own.
2) for every hour of broadcasting any public meeting or presentation by a pubic official these broadcats should be followed immediately by an additional hour where a panel nominated and elected by rate payers can fully discuss the content of the meeting or presentation, with a spectrum of views reprsented. These panels would then get to ask and answer questions brought up live by viewers. Since the public would get to vote on the composition of such a panels, it would guarantee fair representation of viewpoints and balanced discussion of issues.
Let's make America great again by returning democracy, rather than allowing monopolies and vested interests to control all that we see and hear on privatized monopoly controlled programming.
If you pay as much as I do for Comcast service ($250/month), the day they break up Comcast's government permitted monopoly will indeed be a great day.
We have to keep in mind that like other cable operators, Comcast is essentially a monopoly in the communities that they serve. This being the case, local and state governments have every right to regulate them and impose conditions on their operation. Indeed, indirectly as a taxpayer I provide them access to public right-aways, so I expect that I should get something for my money or be in a position to have another cable company come in and do the job.
I've been tracking their service for a number of years now. There are several things that can be noticed that bear directly on what unregulated monopoloies can get away with.
1) they are increasing the number of channels, but 95% of these are purely advertisment/sales only operations. No programming just sales.
2) their scheduled progamming includes networks that steadily increase the number of commercials per hour without any recourse for the consumer to pay only for the channels used. Thus they get extra advertising dollars at my expense as a consumer.
3) they provide almost no public services for local and state governments and local NGO's and other groups to present alternative views so they heavily censor potentially alternative views in the "market". Likewise, they have almost no truly educational channels, say that teach science, geography, literature, social studies, etc. The few that do have limited input into scheduling or time alotments.
4) They force you to choose viewing plans that provide you no choice, but to pay extra for an incredible number of channels I would never watch. They benefit because it makes it seems they are providing more, but in reality they are merely charging more for useless product. Let those who want to watch the shopping channels pay for the priviledge. As a captive consumer, I should be able to decline paying for them, even when I don't watch them.
5) they are providing less and less quality programming for the "basic service" (ie access to networks) dumbing it down and forcing viewers to pay for "premium" services just to have anything worth watching at all.
6) they give a lot of money as a government monopoly to political candidates that support their vested interest, skewing and disadvantaging public discourse.
I say that the laws governing local cable monopolies need to be revised, so that local governments can establish their own services and develop efforts to insure that every part of the country has true competition in the cable markets. We need to move away from monopolies. If monopolies are essential, then they should be government run monopoloies that taxpayers have a direct voice in how they are run.
It's about time that public utility regulators are replaced with office holders that put some pressure on cable company monopolies to do something other than parasitize their customers. Otherwise,its time to vote out the current crop and replace them with more progressive minded citizens, who actually represent the public rather than the cable company monopolies.
That argument breaks down entirely given the fact that the first 2 or 3 FISA warrents on Carter Page, were initiated several months before the Steele dossier was even prepared. The FISA warrent in question was the 3rd or 4th one approved by the FISA Court. The memo also leaves out numerous accounts tha tthe Steele dossier was intially commissioned by one of the GOP presidential campaigns prior to the Clinton campaign paying to get their hands on it.
This memo reveals that the Trump administrationwill do anything, even destroy the FBI and let a foreign agent go free in an effort to try to discredit the Steele dossier. No wonder Putin thinks he has the upper hand.
Scott Pruitt and Ryan Zinke appear ready to put in a large order as part of their efforts to "improve" public lands.
Evidently, they figure it will be a lot quicker to reach their goals than waiting for timber companies to do clear cutting or just waiting for global warming and pine bark beetles to decimate national forests.
Unfortunately, the facts surrounding the examples you use (Lois Lerner and Bundy ranch) don't actually bear out your thesis. Rather they merely show that with enough Fox News propaganda, when combined with the conspiracy industry can distort the truth out of anything.
The sad part is that now Fox is targeting the military, denying vetrans benefits deserved, targeting the VA for cuts, supporting the defence contractor advertisers over the men and women who actually put their lives on the line to serve. Although it benefits Rupert Murdoch's bottom line, it also does the work of USA's competitors for them. No wonder we are rapidly loosing allies throughout the world and abandoning world leadership to others.
"There can be only one"
This is precisely the kind of thinking that gets humans into the predicament that we are in. All effort gets placed into being the one, rather than actually solving problems for mutual benefit of all. Sadly, it looks more and more like global warming will take us all, before we as a species figure this out.
It seems to me that you missed the point of having honesty and integrity in their original mission statement and why it was important.
No one is pretending that the NSA isn't a spy agency. Likewise, no one is pretending that spying isn't necessary when there are authoritarian regimes and organizations eager to take advantage of US citizens. The critical issue is what values, goals and aspirations is it spying for and what motivates the spying. Unless the citizenry has confidence in those, we might as well stop spying and give in to our authoritarian adversaries.
A series of middle eastern wars since the Balfour Decrlation created a "jewish homeland", proves that Jews are preety much like everyone else when it comes to pacifism and warmongering. The trick is to find away out of the cycle of violence and put such animosity and hostility behind us, so that we can focus on bigger problems, like keeping planet Earth habitable in the latter half of the 21st century and the 22nd century. Unless this is done, humanity is very unlikely to experience a 23rd century.
What on earth are you talking about? The recent CR just approved will only last until 8 February.
Despite all the hype and bloviating, little progess has been made in actually solving the problems that matter. Take ocean acification for instance. In 300 years at the current rate of acidification, virtually all life in the ocean will disappear. Given that humans get 50% of all their protein from the oceans, this will have profound effects. Indeed, there is already wide spread evidence of this. Oysters are disappearing from the menus everywhere. Pteropods, the base of much of the marine food chain are rapidly declining in abundance. Unfortunately, pretending such problems aren't there and doing nothing about it isn't going to prevent a lifeless ocean.
Not so much ilarious as tragic. As more and more fall for Trump's authoritarian approach, freedom, honesty, and integrity is at risk everywhere.
The WH and Fox News are going all out on the efforts to besmirch government institutions to protect Trump and his foreign allies and advance their politcal adgenda. It used to be that people believed in the rule of law. Now as is evident from Fox News coverage a higher priority is 1) coercive political power and 2) the greed that motivates it.
Abe Lincoln was right. You can fool some of the people all the time.
The sad part is that so far the only approach the US has taken in countering meddling and cybercrime by authoritarian regimes is to become one instead. This is not going to end well, either for demoracy or the rule of law. However, as the old Judy Collins song used to say "you won't know what you have lost until it is gone".
How would you know now that Trump's political operatives have taken over?
Has the time for 10 trillion bit cryptography now arrived?
Predictable yes. Acceptable no.
We need to move to a system in which after the first offence. Johns are given a choice: 1) castration and penis removal, 2) life on a small island with others like themselves.
I can see why you post as an Anonymous Coward. You equate women and girls as commodities.