Maybe not like that, but it's conceivable that you could steganographically hide files inside the coded video stream, like how they embed digital watermarks. An interesting idea.
I'm not asking about Truth, I'm asking about belief and the human psyche. I'm sure that in Pedanticworld where you seem to live, they are equivalent, but they're not here on Earth. So on Earth, where Earthlings live, the burden of proof is on the mystics. My question is what drives man to believe in these things. I'm really only interested in finding out what James Randi thinks about it, not playing retarded parlor games with dull slashdot denizens.
Right, but until someone can demonstrate the ability, there is far more reason to assume it doesn't exist. While the fact that nobody can (or will) demonstrate it doesn't prove the negative, it certainly doesn't add any support to the idea. So sure, in a strictly technical logical sense you're right, but in a realistic, maybe more pragmatic way, I consider the lack of demonstration as evidence to the non-existence. Just like unicorns. You can't prove they don't exist, but in reality there is no reason to believe they do.
A prison term of 105 years is excessive, but a $500 fine for criminally using someone else's account? No way.
Ok, but there must be some sort of middle ground there somewhere. I think a short stint in jail and a shitload of community service would be an acceptable punishment.
I find it particularly obnoxious that people who defend the right of citizen to bare arms, complain when the military and police practice with theirs. Doubt standard, much?
No, not really. You're comparing two completely different things.
Who could have imagined that the day would come when I would be affraid of my own government?
Every single person who knows the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. It's not for sportsmen, it's not for hunters, it's for this exact scenario. If the government becomes tyrannical, do you really want them to be the only ones with guns?
Probably not small if you consider the entire cash chain, from cashier thru management thru accounting thru banking etc... Maybe not as hefty as the CC fees, but fair's fair.
talk about melodramatic. it has nothing to do with being mommy. it has to do with business. apple has a market, and they cater to their market because that's who pays the bills. imagine if you owned a cafe, and you had a bulletin board where people could post want ads, missing pets, etc... now some loser comes in and puts up a bunch of nudie pics. you know a vast majority of your clientele are middle-class soccer mom types who would frown on such a thing. what do you do? take it down, or leave it up?
if you don't like what apple does, maybe you can start your own multi-hundred-billion-dollar company and do it your way...
I wholeheartedly agree. Putting the cost on the card users is the right way.
Then we should put the extra labor cost of manipulating and accounting all the cash money onto only the cash customers. And we should put the cost of those electric scooters on the fat/crippled people, and the cost of automatic doors on people with no arms. I never use the bathroom at the supermarket, so maybe it should just cost $1 per use. And there are certain aisles that I never shop from, so maybe the cost of stocking those items can be put on only the people who buy them -- it costs $1 to access any given aisle. I never shop at the deli or fish counters, so we should just charge $1 to access those also...
Just because it's in range doesn't mean they have a guidance system that will actually get it here, or that it won't explode 10m off the launch pad.
That could be the ticket. If we could secretly "engineer" this scenario to happen, we get a free nuke strike on NK and make them look like idiots in the process.
Slashdot Mirror
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me.... you can't get fooled again.
Maybe not like that, but it's conceivable that you could steganographically hide files inside the coded video stream, like how they embed digital watermarks. An interesting idea.
I'm not asking about Truth, I'm asking about belief and the human psyche. I'm sure that in Pedanticworld where you seem to live, they are equivalent, but they're not here on Earth. So on Earth, where Earthlings live, the burden of proof is on the mystics. My question is what drives man to believe in these things. I'm really only interested in finding out what James Randi thinks about it, not playing retarded parlor games with dull slashdot denizens.
Right, but until someone can demonstrate the ability, there is far more reason to assume it doesn't exist. While the fact that nobody can (or will) demonstrate it doesn't prove the negative, it certainly doesn't add any support to the idea. So sure, in a strictly technical logical sense you're right, but in a realistic, maybe more pragmatic way, I consider the lack of demonstration as evidence to the non-existence. Just like unicorns. You can't prove they don't exist, but in reality there is no reason to believe they do.
A prison term of 105 years is excessive, but a $500 fine for criminally using someone else's account? No way.
Ok, but there must be some sort of middle ground there somewhere. I think a short stint in jail and a shitload of community service would be an acceptable punishment.
"computer intrusion" certainly sounds like a sex crime, from a computer's point of view...
What do you think is the root cause of humans' obsession with believing in supernatural powers, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
I find it particularly obnoxious that people who defend the right of citizen to bare arms, complain when the military and police practice with theirs. Doubt standard, much?
No, not really. You're comparing two completely different things.
Who could have imagined that the day would come when I would be affraid of my own government?
Every single person who knows the purpose of the 2nd Amendment. It's not for sportsmen, it's not for hunters, it's for this exact scenario. If the government becomes tyrannical, do you really want them to be the only ones with guns?
Probably not small if you consider the entire cash chain, from cashier thru management thru accounting thru banking etc... Maybe not as hefty as the CC fees, but fair's fair.
talk about melodramatic. it has nothing to do with being mommy. it has to do with business. apple has a market, and they cater to their market because that's who pays the bills. imagine if you owned a cafe, and you had a bulletin board where people could post want ads, missing pets, etc... now some loser comes in and puts up a bunch of nudie pics. you know a vast majority of your clientele are middle-class soccer mom types who would frown on such a thing. what do you do? take it down, or leave it up?
if you don't like what apple does, maybe you can start your own multi-hundred-billion-dollar company and do it your way...
The bug is that they didn't put the batteries into a fireproof container to begin with.
Why do these planes even have chemical batteries? Surely they could fit an alternator and some ultracapacitors in there somewhere...
You've been in Double-Secret-War for a couple years now
Says something about Gimp, doesn't it?
I wholeheartedly agree. Putting the cost on the card users is the right way.
Then we should put the extra labor cost of manipulating and accounting all the cash money onto only the cash customers. And we should put the cost of those electric scooters on the fat/crippled people, and the cost of automatic doors on people with no arms. I never use the bathroom at the supermarket, so maybe it should just cost $1 per use. And there are certain aisles that I never shop from, so maybe the cost of stocking those items can be put on only the people who buy them -- it costs $1 to access any given aisle. I never shop at the deli or fish counters, so we should just charge $1 to access those also...
Makes sense considering the average attention span of their demographic
ah, yes. understood.
Just because it's in range doesn't mean they have a guidance system that will actually get it here, or that it won't explode 10m off the launch pad.
That could be the ticket. If we could secretly "engineer" this scenario to happen, we get a free nuke strike on NK and make them look like idiots in the process.
Since when does the US == the world?
That's why I drink turtle essence every morning.
You are an editor of an internationally renowned news aggregation service.
You mean Fark?
We still don't have terribly reliable/safe/cheap ways to deliver payloads into space. How about giant slingshots as a space launch platform?
I didn't say "any religion", I said "too much religion". There is a difference, but I don't expect you to get it...
Example #1. If you over-const, people will eventually cast it away rather than completely refactoring a class hierarchy.