Wasn't this technology developed by construction workers quite some time ago?
It's sad when a human being's job is replaced by a machine. Of course, it it can't recognize fat people, then I suppose the technology still has a ways to go in this regards.
Wikipedia != Authoritative? Recently, this article caused a bit of a stir from its casual dismissal of the wiki model, and even the implication that Wikipedia was perhaps being deceptive by appearing too authoritative. Some suggested an experiment: insert some mistakes into Wikipedia, and see how long it lasts. Alex Halavais actually performed the experiment, and found that all his errors were removed within hours.
Still, this doesn't bode well. I suppose the only thing worse than a slashdotting would be suggeting to a wide range of people that they go to Wikipedia and insert mistakes.
I have a better idea. Call up 5 local newspapers and report some stories, inserting 5 details that are provably false. I'll bet they do far worse than wikipedia in catching them.
If you think stress is expensive, see how much a trip to Hawaii costs.
Or, alternatly, see how much stress you're under when you don't have a job AFTER that vacation. I had a friend working at Accenture. He had 8 weeks vacation time due him(saved up), but he knew if he actually used it he'd probably wouldn't have a job when he came back.
you are saying that the type of weapon and the intent of the weapon makes a difference when civilians die
I don't care about the type. But the intent? Yes. Intent is a matter of law. Law is a matter of interest to outside nations. I'm sure you're right that people on the ground don't give a damn.
Were there a bunch of Jewish settlers prior to WW II (say 1700-1932)
There were Jews there in that time period. Call them 'settlers' if you like. They lived with the transjordanian settelers and generally got along pretty well with them, though they were still treated as visitors in a foreign land by either the British occupiers or the other arab settlers. But yes, there were many immigrants to Israel then, and 100 years before then and 200 years before then. Even in the time of the crusades, there were Jews near Jerusalem, though they had to pay special taxes for not being Muslims. Of course, for the time this was pretty lenient treatment for people living in a nation that they didn't control. Some Russians, decendants of the Khazars, might never have lived in Israel. And the tide of immigration due to Zionism began a fair bit before WWII.
who employed a much larger number of Arabs as menial laborers?
Explain this to me, because I truly don't understand it. What's keeping Palestinians from working in, say, Jordan. Does Israel prevent it?
The notion that jobs are exploitation is one that I've always had a little trouble buying into, especially in Israel. Israel has a labor surplus as it is.
what if we gave them a higher standard of living than the average Israeli, it seems obvious that in general people with high standards of living are not individually interested in going to fight people with a lower standard of living unless conscripted by the military or if the other people come over and rip the gameboy out of their hands)
Which is why the US has one of the largest militaries in the world and has nearly always been in a war somewhere in the world?
If the palestinians had more money, it would not be evenly distributed. The PA is corrupt. There are plenty of gangs that demand protection money. If there was greater wealth in the West Bank, it would flow towards this hierarchy, and quite a bit would be spent on weapons. I don't buy the notion that more wealth would end the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Maybe it would stem the tide of the recruits, but wealth is a force multiplier. Besides, it's suicidal to try and fight a war to a standstill, like the US tried in vietnam. You either fight to win or you get ready to lose. What nation is going to respond to an attack by giving people money? That sends a very bad message.
The PLO was formed to take back the territory that is Israel, and was active before Israel was even in the West Bank. There's little to demonstrate that the palestinians have changed their compact.
So in the Israeli/Palestianian conflict it seems like you like to define whether something is "terrorism" or not is by what kind of weapon is used, not who gets killed by it - C 4 under a bus = terrorism, F-16 with a "made in the USA" missile = clean, "fair and balanced" warfare. WTF? Are you sure you didn't get that from another discussion? I didn't define terrorism. For the record, I think it's based on the type of target. i.e. a missle fired at a Hammas member that takes out one of his nearby supporters is not terrorism. A missle fired directly at an innocent civilian would be.
The comparison between S. Africa and Israel is obnoxious at best. Jews have lived in Israel for over 2000 years. They're not 'colonizing' the area any more than the arab states 'colonized' the middle east when the British left. The saudis still have, straight out black slavery, for example. But people never talk about the things arabs do to their own citizens. Do arabs only have civil rights when they live in the West Bank?
Many of the palastinian paramilitary/terrorist groups are puppets for other nations. As long as Iran wants Israel gone, for example, doing things for Palestinains, by itself, isn't going to fix anything.
On the other hand, if the occupation was less brutal, if people's houses stopped being demolished, if soldiers stopped humiliating and murdering people for sport**, I think Hamas wouldn't be able to find a single recruit, and the violence would stop.
Of course, Arafat said he'd put 5 bullets in the chest of anyone who stops the PA from making Jerusalem its capital, and he refused to go through with Oslo because it required giving up the 'Palestinian right of return' to Israeli territory. Fufilling such a request would make it impossible for Israel to defend itself in a war.
There are extremists in both political camps. And Arafat isn't even the most agressive among the Palestianian leaders.
Hamas would still be able to find recruits if the violence stopped since they still consider the land that is Israel to be theirs and want to fight for it. Just as some Israeli radicals consider broad swatches of now-arab territory to be part of Israel's herritage and want to fight for it.
What you do with your tax dollars is your business, of course. But the only thing keeping the various terrorst groups from mounting more agressive attacks against Israel is their physial inabillity to get better weapons.
Aggressive settlement (in any other situation, we'd call it colonization)
Colonization is like what Brittan did to India - i.e. destroy the industry and use the people to produce raw materials to feed the colonizer's industrial economy. I don't think that this is Israel's primary objective, though it does use a lot of Palestinian labor. Settlement, on the other hand (or resettlement depending on your view of history) is an attempt to actually live on the land and kick out the people who are there.
If you get in an accident with a doctor and you're injured or your car is damaged, and it's the doctor's fault, he can cover it. Joe sixpack can't, on the other hand.
I think you should be able to go without auto insurance if you can post some kind of collateral to prove you have assets.
Even in a free country (which is somthing that's becoming more uncertain every day), a person has to be able to take responsibility for their actions.
_I_ know that. And _you_ know that. But don't tell the ditzy blondes.
I wonder what they'll tell Chinese people
on
China Goes Nuclear
·
· Score: 1
When I was in Nanjing recently, I drove a little under an hour from the city to spend some time at the home of a student (more an accepted practice than it is in the states, and a good way to get some extra education for your kid.)
My homestay family told me that a power plant by the side of the road with a long system of pipes snaking around the far perimeter (the part away from the plant and nearer the road) was an oil refinery, I believe or somthing related to fossil fuels. The tower looked for all the world like a nuclear cooling tower. The whole 'thick spindle' shape.
I'm curious, does anyone know of any types of cooling towers that normally resemble nuclear cooling towers? Or was I being fed what people wanted me to hear.
Not nessicarily. Genes are non-deterministic, self altering (in terms of regulators), and irreducably complex. You can't model them like you could model a nuclear explosion. Genetic code, particularly for eukaryotes, is not somthing which can be effectivly modeled, no mater how fast the computer. There's a near infinite number of factors and variables. You'd need the genetic environment, and an actual instantiation of the code (a living creature) to understand how it really behaved.
I was going by presidents, like the Brittish system. George Washington was the first president named George, Bush senior was the second, George W. Bush was the third Bush named George.
If Kerry is a Skull and Bones man, what does it matter who wins?
Of course, you don't give the British enough credit. Rebeling against the king was largely a symbolic gesture. The Brits had a parliment then, and while the house of Lords was hereditary, the house of commons at least was somewhat representative.
Halfway through the Revolutionary war, the Brits actually offered America their demand of representation, but they turned it down. They'd gone too far.
The reasons for the revolution were partly economic, incidentally, and similar to the later civil war since we've brought that up. The more industrialized sector (England, the North) needed the supplier of raw goods (America, the South) but the supplier of raw goods didn't like the terms that the industrialized sector was offering. So they rebeled.
I agree with you completly. Parts of the Republican party have really started to believe their rhetoric about how they're the "Only Moral Party" and the end result will be an assault on democracy, coupled with the inevitable justification that their adversaries somehow started it.
Yes, specifically regarding challenge procedures, given this current topic. What happens when one parent doesn't think a book is appropriate. What about when a minority doesn't think a book is appropriate? What about a majority?
I wasn't being speculative. You misinterpreted my tone. Yes, bananas come from El Salvador and central America, Jimica is from Mexico, etc. etc.
Blueberries, on the other hand, are usually grown in America and the growers go to great pains to get (often illegal) immigrant workers all the way to Michigan to provide cheap labor for growing the stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
can it pick up chicks?
Wasn't this technology developed by construction workers quite some time ago?
It's sad when a human being's job is replaced by a machine. Of course, it it can't recognize fat people, then I suppose the technology still has a ways to go in this regards.
Wikipedia != Authoritative?
Recently, this article caused a bit of a stir from its casual dismissal of the wiki model, and even the implication that Wikipedia was perhaps being deceptive by appearing too authoritative. Some suggested an experiment: insert some mistakes into Wikipedia, and see how long it lasts. Alex Halavais actually performed the experiment, and found that all his errors were removed within hours.
Still, this doesn't bode well. I suppose the only thing worse than a slashdotting would be suggeting to a wide range of people that they go to Wikipedia and insert mistakes.
I have a better idea. Call up 5 local newspapers and report some stories, inserting 5 details that are provably false. I'll bet they do far worse than wikipedia in catching them.
If you think stress is expensive, see how much a trip to Hawaii costs.
Or, alternatly, see how much stress you're under when you don't have a job AFTER that vacation. I had a friend working at Accenture. He had 8 weeks vacation time due him(saved up), but he knew if he actually used it he'd probably wouldn't have a job when he came back.
you are saying that the type of weapon and the intent of the weapon makes a difference when civilians die
I don't care about the type. But the intent? Yes. Intent is a matter of law. Law is a matter of interest to outside nations. I'm sure you're right that people on the ground don't give a damn.
Were there a bunch of Jewish settlers prior to WW II (say 1700-1932)
There were Jews there in that time period. Call them 'settlers' if you like. They lived with the transjordanian settelers and generally got along pretty well with them, though they were still treated as visitors in a foreign land by either the British occupiers or the other arab settlers. But yes, there were many immigrants to Israel then, and 100 years before then and 200 years before then. Even in the time of the crusades, there were Jews near Jerusalem, though they had to pay special taxes for not being Muslims. Of course, for the time this was pretty lenient treatment for people living in a nation that they didn't control. Some Russians, decendants of the Khazars, might never have lived in Israel. And the tide of immigration due to Zionism began a fair bit before WWII.
who employed a much larger number of Arabs as menial laborers?
Explain this to me, because I truly don't understand it. What's keeping Palestinians from working in, say, Jordan. Does Israel prevent it?
The notion that jobs are exploitation is one that I've always had a little trouble buying into, especially in Israel. Israel has a labor surplus as it is.
what if we gave them a higher standard of living than the average Israeli, it seems obvious that in general people with high standards of living are not individually interested in going to fight people with a lower standard of living unless conscripted by the military or if the other people come over and rip the gameboy out of their hands)
Which is why the US has one of the largest militaries in the world and has nearly always been in a war somewhere in the world?
If the palestinians had more money, it would not be evenly distributed. The PA is corrupt. There are plenty of gangs that demand protection money. If there was greater wealth in the West Bank, it would flow towards this hierarchy, and quite a bit would be spent on weapons. I don't buy the notion that more wealth would end the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Maybe it would stem the tide of the recruits, but wealth is a force multiplier. Besides, it's suicidal to try and fight a war to a standstill, like the US tried in vietnam. You either fight to win or you get ready to lose. What nation is going to respond to an attack by giving people money? That sends a very bad message.
The PLO was formed to take back the territory that is Israel, and was active before Israel was even in the West Bank. There's little to demonstrate that the palestinians have changed their compact.
So in the Israeli/Palestianian conflict it seems like you like to define whether something is "terrorism" or not is by what kind of weapon is used, not who gets killed by it - C 4 under a bus = terrorism, F-16 with a "made in the USA" missile = clean, "fair and balanced" warfare. WTF?
Are you sure you didn't get that from another discussion? I didn't define terrorism. For the record, I think it's based on the type of target. i.e. a missle fired at a Hammas member that takes out one of his nearby supporters is not terrorism. A missle fired directly at an innocent civilian would be.
The comparison between S. Africa and Israel is obnoxious at best. Jews have lived in Israel for over 2000 years. They're not 'colonizing' the area any more than the arab states 'colonized' the middle east when the British left. The saudis still have, straight out black slavery, for example. But people never talk about the things arabs do to their own citizens. Do arabs only have civil rights when they live in the West Bank?
Many of the palastinian paramilitary/terrorist groups are puppets for other nations. As long as Iran wants Israel gone, for example, doing things for Palestinains, by itself, isn't going to fix anything.
three words; :)
calissavirus in Australia.
On the other hand, if the occupation was less brutal, if people's houses stopped being demolished, if soldiers stopped humiliating and murdering people for sport**, I think Hamas wouldn't be able to find a single recruit, and the violence would stop.
Of course, Arafat said he'd put 5 bullets in the chest of anyone who stops the PA from making Jerusalem its capital, and he refused to go through with Oslo because it required giving up the 'Palestinian right of return' to Israeli territory. Fufilling such a request would make it impossible for Israel to defend itself in a war.
There are extremists in both political camps. And Arafat isn't even the most agressive among the Palestianian leaders.
Hamas would still be able to find recruits if the violence stopped since they still consider the land that is Israel to be theirs and want to fight for it. Just as some Israeli radicals consider broad swatches of now-arab territory to be part of Israel's herritage and want to fight for it.
What you do with your tax dollars is your business, of course. But the only thing keeping the various terrorst groups from mounting more agressive attacks against Israel is their physial inabillity to get better weapons.
Aggressive settlement (in any other situation, we'd call it colonization)
Colonization is like what Brittan did to India - i.e. destroy the industry and use the people to produce raw materials to feed the colonizer's industrial economy. I don't think that this is Israel's primary objective, though it does use a lot of Palestinian labor. Settlement, on the other hand (or resettlement depending on your view of history) is an attempt to actually live on the land and kick out the people who are there.
If you get in an accident with a doctor and you're injured or your car is damaged, and it's the doctor's fault, he can cover it. Joe sixpack can't, on the other hand.
I think you should be able to go without auto insurance if you can post some kind of collateral to prove you have assets.
Even in a free country (which is somthing that's becoming more uncertain every day), a person has to be able to take responsibility for their actions.
The captain has turned on the no talking sign. Shut the hell up. Please return your mouths to an upright and locked position.
Dude, he just bugs the stewardesses. Why do you think they call it the cockpit?
_I_ know that. And _you_ know that. But don't tell the ditzy blondes.
When I was in Nanjing recently, I drove a little under an hour from the city to spend some time at the home of a student (more an accepted practice than it is in the states, and a good way to get some extra education for your kid.)
My homestay family told me that a power plant by the side of the road with a long system of pipes snaking around the far perimeter (the part away from the plant and nearer the road) was an oil refinery, I believe or somthing related to fossil fuels. The tower looked for all the world like a nuclear cooling tower. The whole 'thick spindle' shape.
I'm curious, does anyone know of any types of cooling towers that normally resemble nuclear cooling towers? Or was I being fed what people wanted me to hear.
unnatural complexity.
It's possible to analyze a language and decipher it as a language without knowing what it says.
In contact, they used the prime numbers as a beacon.
Worst... intelligent... civilization... ever!
Not nessicarily. Genes are non-deterministic, self altering (in terms of regulators), and irreducably complex. You can't model them like you could model a nuclear explosion. Genetic code, particularly for eukaryotes, is not somthing which can be effectivly modeled, no mater how fast the computer. There's a near infinite number of factors and variables. You'd need the genetic environment, and an actual instantiation of the code (a living creature) to understand how it really behaved.
A 100 pound laptop?
Not unless I have an 800 pound lap.
So do we hate "Do we hate X today" jokes today or not?
... said the collective voice
"Yes. Yes we all do. "
I was going by presidents, like the Brittish system. George Washington was the first president named George, Bush senior was the second, George W. Bush was the third Bush named George.
If Kerry is a Skull and Bones man, what does it matter who wins?
Yeah, you know all those raging liberal mobs who like to run around and beat up young republicans with baseball bats.
that we once again seem to have a King George
Another King George the Third, no less.
Of course, you don't give the British enough credit. Rebeling against the king was largely a symbolic gesture. The Brits had a parliment then, and while the house of Lords was hereditary, the house of commons at least was somewhat representative.
Halfway through the Revolutionary war, the Brits actually offered America their demand of representation, but they turned it down. They'd gone too far.
The reasons for the revolution were partly economic, incidentally, and similar to the later civil war since we've brought that up. The more industrialized sector (England, the North) needed the supplier of raw goods (America, the South) but the supplier of raw goods didn't like the terms that the industrialized sector was offering. So they rebeled.
I agree with you completly. Parts of the Republican party have really started to believe their rhetoric about how they're the "Only Moral Party" and the end result will be an assault on democracy, coupled with the inevitable justification that their adversaries somehow started it.
Thanks! Beautiful! Of course, by now I don't know if anyone else is reading the thread, but still. Thanks.
Er, do you want more on how librarians decide?
Yes, specifically regarding challenge procedures, given this current topic. What happens when one parent doesn't think a book is appropriate. What about when a minority doesn't think a book is appropriate? What about a majority?
I wasn't being speculative. You misinterpreted my tone. Yes, bananas come from El Salvador and central America, Jimica is from Mexico, etc. etc.
Blueberries, on the other hand, are usually grown in America and the growers go to great pains to get (often illegal) immigrant workers all the way to Michigan to provide cheap labor for growing the stuff.
Shouldn't I be free to use whatever third party software to check my email?
If you don't like their policies, they'll refund your money.