The microwave radiation used in mobile phones is non-ionising. There is as much reason to expect a mobile phone to give you brain cancer as there is to expect your angle poise lamp to give you skin cancer. People hear the word "radiation" and it conjures up images like the incredible hulk, or men in hazmat suits hosing down contaminated reactor buildings. Radiation just means energy travelling away from a point source in all directions - it doesn't mean "deadly poison". Ionising Radiation is the kind that knocks electrons off of atoms, changing the structure of molecules, damaging cells/DNA, etc. This is not the kind of radiation emitted by cellphones.
So you've contrived one very very specific situation where saving the wearer might kill multiple people - surely that's a matter of judgement on the part of the person deploying the suits to not put the suit on someone who can blow everyone up if they are administered an electric shock without warning?
He merely posted a question. Your histrionic chew-out is a little uncalled for don't you think? You don't need to back up a question with data, just the answer.
That's the broken window fallacy. The time you waste (albeit paid) fiddling with incompatibilities, is time you could be being paid to do something that benefits the software ecosystem, the company you work for and ultimately the economy.
I was a big fan of going nuclear till i found about Peak uranium - It seems nuclear fission is only a short term stop gap since we're running out of uranium too. And by running out, i mean running out of uranium that doesn't cost nearly as much energy to acquire as it produces.
This money isn't being pissed up the wall - it's an investment for the local community. Once the project is complete, everyone's electricity bills will be funnelled back into the local government rather than the pockets of whoever supplies the fuel for the current power supply. The current (no pun intended) supplier might even be outside the US so it's doubly beneficial to invest this money locally. If the local government has a revenue stream from this power station, then they can either cut local taxes, or spend more locally, so the tax payer eventually get a return on money well invested.
The whole thing is pointless - why not just put 64GBs of ram in your PC and let it fill it up with disk cache. This makes no sense. If you compare this thing to just putting the RAM in your PC there are NO upsides. The data is vulnerable, it's massively expensive and an inefficient use of the RAM modules. Madness.
this comes up quite frequently - america has different gallons to everyone else so you can't compare uk mpg directly to us mpg. 28miles/usg = 34miles/ukg. (which still aint spectacular)- 45ukmpg would work out 37usmpg.
That source code modification was no accident. No one "accidentally" does conscientous enough work to get the type of status that allows them to make that modification, then makes a specific, "underhanded" change that makes the algorithm handshake to one of 100,000 keypairs (not one of a very few, or always the same one -- one of 100,000, so that even if people actually looked at some of the keys they would assume each one was random), while getting the change approved.
that statement is pretty much entirely composed of straw men, unsubstantiated assertions, and arguments from ignorance and incredulity. Do you have anything to back up what you're saying?
As well as requiring even the tiniest shred of evidence, your hypothesis needs to address the following issue - how did the hypothesised conspirators intend to avoid their exploit being exposed in the inevitable way that it has been? If there was no possible way to do that, why did they bother at all? Even if you could come up with an answer, you would need to produce some evidence to back it up, otherwise it falls foul of Occam's razor by introducing yet another unnecessary assumption to an argument already composed entirely of unnecessary assumptions.
your apple example is just a rehash of the argument i already addressed that just because it's possible to keep a secret for some finite period of time depending on how many people know it, or that people do conspire with one another, does not justify the purely speculative rationalisations of a paranoid "conspiracy theory" and its' omniscient omnipotent conspirators that are used as a furnace into which to hurl any evidence that contradicts some baseless and arbitrary belief, including, recursively, the belief in the conspiracy itself.
im not posting this to be smug, but i run firefox with adblock plus and noscript installed and i've barely seen a single ad for 3 years, and absolutely no pop ups. Noscript also blocks flash and java apps from loading till you click on them which saves time and bandwidth. If you're sick of ads on the internet then I highly recommend it - when i use IE on someone else's PC the difference in clutter and obnoxious flashing junk in web pages makes me wonder how i ever put up with it.
The term "conspiracy theory" is a label for a specific type of belief. It is not meant to imply that there is no such thing as a conspiracy. It is referring to beliefs which require undetectable and omnipotent "conspiracies" in order to rationalise away all counter-evidence to that belief. The conspiracy in a "Conspiracy theory" is an incidental conceit. There are many actual conspiracies uncovered throughout history. But those were detected by uncovering legitimate evidence of their existence, rather than merely asserting they exist to make up for the lack of evidence for some other claim. The existence of actual conspiracies does nothing to shore up the weak reasoning used to invoke "conspiracy theories".
Reading through the comments on that bug, it seems that a fix relies on a change in Xorg which they said happens at a glacial pace, and this bug is deferred till that change is made. Not a lot they can do about it really.
and why is it relevant? and what about all the other former colonies of britian like india and south africa? and what about all the countries with similiar legal tradition thats aren't former colonies of britain like sweden and france? you've selected the countries that fit your arbitrary pattern and tried to retrofit some kind of causal link between them that is "the only explanation" for something that exists purely in your mind.
It's not the only theory that explains what's going on. Of an infinite number of arbitrary and baseless hypotheses it's the one that you've selected that arbitrarily generates causation between a bunch of unrelated (anglo saxon? please....) occurrences. With nothing to back it up, your "theory" (actually an hypothesis) is eliminated by occam's razor. Since it relies upon an unnecessary and arbitrary assumption, it is less likely to be true than the null hypothesis.
Your unstated major premise is that there needs to be a explanation that connects all these events, when in fact there is absolutely nothing, other than your intuition, that suggests this. It's perfectly valid for there to be no "theory" at all.
Slashdot Mirror
The microwave radiation used in mobile phones is non-ionising. There is as much reason to expect a mobile phone to give you brain cancer as there is to expect your angle poise lamp to give you skin cancer. People hear the word "radiation" and it conjures up images like the incredible hulk, or men in hazmat suits hosing down contaminated reactor buildings. Radiation just means energy travelling away from a point source in all directions - it doesn't mean "deadly poison". Ionising Radiation is the kind that knocks electrons off of atoms, changing the structure of molecules, damaging cells/DNA, etc. This is not the kind of radiation emitted by cellphones.
So you've contrived one very very specific situation where saving the wearer might kill multiple people - surely that's a matter of judgement on the part of the person deploying the suits to not put the suit on someone who can blow everyone up if they are administered an electric shock without warning?
perhaps something better will come in its place
the beast with no backs?
So why don't you shoot yourself in the head right now?
My remark was directed at your over emotional disposition, not his. Perhaps you should have a nice cup of cocoa and listen to some whalesong.
He merely posted a question. Your histrionic chew-out is a little uncalled for don't you think? You don't need to back up a question with data, just the answer.
My brains.. are going into.. my feet...!
That's the broken window fallacy. The time you waste (albeit paid) fiddling with incompatibilities, is time you could be being paid to do something that benefits the software ecosystem, the company you work for and ultimately the economy.
I was a big fan of going nuclear till i found about Peak uranium - It seems nuclear fission is only a short term stop gap since we're running out of uranium too. And by running out, i mean running out of uranium that doesn't cost nearly as much energy to acquire as it produces.
And what advantages does you RAM drive provide over simply having a very large disk cache combined with regular hard drive?
That isn't an advantage - it's more of an overly elaborate kludge to ameliorate a disadvantage.
This money isn't being pissed up the wall - it's an investment for the local community. Once the project is complete, everyone's electricity bills will be funnelled back into the local government rather than the pockets of whoever supplies the fuel for the current power supply. The current (no pun intended) supplier might even be outside the US so it's doubly beneficial to invest this money locally. If the local government has a revenue stream from this power station, then they can either cut local taxes, or spend more locally, so the tax payer eventually get a return on money well invested.
Also - if you had 64GBs in your PC there is plenty of space to create a RAM Disk in memory if you specifically needed one.
The whole thing is pointless - why not just put 64GBs of ram in your PC and let it fill it up with disk cache. This makes no sense. If you compare this thing to just putting the RAM in your PC there are NO upsides. The data is vulnerable, it's massively expensive and an inefficient use of the RAM modules. Madness.
this comes up quite frequently - america has different gallons to everyone else so you can't compare uk mpg directly to us mpg. 28miles/usg = 34miles/ukg. (which still aint spectacular)- 45ukmpg would work out 37usmpg.
That source code modification was no accident. No one "accidentally" does conscientous enough work to get the type of status that allows them to make that modification, then makes a specific, "underhanded" change that makes the algorithm handshake to one of 100,000 keypairs (not one of a very few, or always the same one -- one of 100,000, so that even if people actually looked at some of the keys they would assume each one was random), while getting the change approved.
that statement is pretty much entirely composed of straw men, unsubstantiated assertions, and arguments from ignorance and incredulity. Do you have anything to back up what you're saying?
As well as requiring even the tiniest shred of evidence, your hypothesis needs to address the following issue - how did the hypothesised conspirators intend to avoid their exploit being exposed in the inevitable way that it has been? If there was no possible way to do that, why did they bother at all? Even if you could come up with an answer, you would need to produce some evidence to back it up, otherwise it falls foul of Occam's razor by introducing yet another unnecessary assumption to an argument already composed entirely of unnecessary assumptions.
your apple example is just a rehash of the argument i already addressed that just because it's possible to keep a secret for some finite period of time depending on how many people know it, or that people do conspire with one another, does not justify the purely speculative rationalisations of a paranoid "conspiracy theory" and its' omniscient omnipotent conspirators that are used as a furnace into which to hurl any evidence that contradicts some baseless and arbitrary belief, including, recursively, the belief in the conspiracy itself.
im not posting this to be smug, but i run firefox with adblock plus and noscript installed and i've barely seen a single ad for 3 years, and absolutely no pop ups. Noscript also blocks flash and java apps from loading till you click on them which saves time and bandwidth. If you're sick of ads on the internet then I highly recommend it - when i use IE on someone else's PC the difference in clutter and obnoxious flashing junk in web pages makes me wonder how i ever put up with it.
The term "conspiracy theory" is a label for a specific type of belief. It is not meant to imply that there is no such thing as a conspiracy. It is referring to beliefs which require undetectable and omnipotent "conspiracies" in order to rationalise away all counter-evidence to that belief. The conspiracy in a "Conspiracy theory" is an incidental conceit. There are many actual conspiracies uncovered throughout history. But those were detected by uncovering legitimate evidence of their existence, rather than merely asserting they exist to make up for the lack of evidence for some other claim. The existence of actual conspiracies does nothing to shore up the weak reasoning used to invoke "conspiracy theories".
Reading through the comments on that bug, it seems that a fix relies on a change in Xorg which they said happens at a glacial pace, and this bug is deferred till that change is made. Not a lot they can do about it really.
and why is it relevant? and what about all the other former colonies of britian like india and south africa? and what about all the countries with similiar legal tradition thats aren't former colonies of britain like sweden and france? you've selected the countries that fit your arbitrary pattern and tried to retrofit some kind of causal link between them that is "the only explanation" for something that exists purely in your mind.
It's not the only theory that explains what's going on. Of an infinite number of arbitrary and baseless hypotheses it's the one that you've selected that arbitrarily generates causation between a bunch of unrelated (anglo saxon? please....) occurrences. With nothing to back it up, your "theory" (actually an hypothesis) is eliminated by occam's razor. Since it relies upon an unnecessary and arbitrary assumption, it is less likely to be true than the null hypothesis.
Your unstated major premise is that there needs to be a explanation that connects all these events, when in fact there is absolutely nothing, other than your intuition, that suggests this. It's perfectly valid for there to be no "theory" at all.
and formaldehyde isn't an ingredient of vaccines, it's merely used during the production process.
also formaldehyde is a natural byproduct of the human digestive system, so OMFG my stomach is poisoning me!!!!!1!!!ONE ONE
A sentence is supposed to begin with a capital letter.
ah i don't have sigs turned on - now it makes sense.