Sorry, apart from the french thing, none of that made sense to me. Especially the bit about intel. Are you serious or just trolling (if the latter I'm afraid this is my last post on this thread). It was quite clearly Bush's wish many years ago to invade Iraq Intel or no. If we fed false intel then I doubt Bush would be so chummy with Blair (who really should know better - as he has at least half a brain).
The news here is definitely as I described, the news there (when I was there last) was as I described, and the news on Fox.com is as I describe. I'm not saying your experience is invalid, just that I don't understand what you're trying to say. And after you insulted my wife, I'm churlishly reticent to put much effort in to doing so.
Anyway good luck over there. I sincerely hope you see passed the madness.
Its delightful of you to refer to my wife as 'a disgusting person'. Though I'm not entirely sure you know her. However, my point was not that she 'hates America' because she doesn't. Its her home and her parent's home. What she hates is the unending misery that we (the rest of the world) receive daily, commonly referred to as world news. We get American commentators telling, not suggesting to, us that we must live by their policies. That the US Government is the moral saviour of the world, that capitalism, left unchecked, will bring prosperity to all, that Islamists are evil, that Communism is evil, that China is our enemy, that liberalism is bad, that Bush is a great man, that communist states spy on their citizens and are therefor even more evil (suggesting US doesn't), that mental torture for years on end, without legal representation is fine, as long as unelected bodies deem those tortured to be 'a threat', that global warming isn't happening, and that if it is, its China's fault, that 'things like this will happen in the heat of war' when children are executed by US soldiers, inmates are sexually assaulted etc... etc..., that invading a country because they might have WMD is fine, despite being the world's leading creator, producer and distributor of WMD, that when tortured captives finally kill themselves, that their suicides are a calculated act of war, that Bush was fairly elected, as long as he and his chums get to decide what 'fairly' is, that Palestine's elected government is not legitimate, but that Iraq's militarily imposed leaders are, that... Believe me I could go on all day, every day, for months. Not one of these assertions is wholly true (despite being sold as God's own sentiment). In fact most of these are outright lies. And when there is one thing that links each one, like Pavlov's dogs, we begin to associate the lies with the connecting experience. Each of these stomach churning untruths is first espoused via a Washington accent.
So now, even when the accent is simply telling us about Angelina Jolie's latest bundle of joy, she, like so many others around the world, cringes. Half expecting to be told that Brad Pit will shortly be appointed Mayer of London, by Bush himself, or that the Lemmington Spar, Women's Institute has been declared a member of the access of evil, we recoil from the screen/speaker.
As for 'But Iran is a nut job'! Believe me, the whole world is united in it's belief of which country is the biggest scariest nut job going, and despite its numerous shortcomings Iran isn't it.
No The UK isn't perfect, but its a century or so since 'we' (obviously I wasn't around then) took it upon 'ourselves' to tell the rest of the world what to do and how to do it. And like Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Holland, Sweden, and the numerous other post Imperialist nations of the world, we learnt our lesson. The difference is, if the US has to learn its lesson the hard way, then there may not be a world left at the end of it.
'I don't know [what weapons the 3rd world war will be fought with], but the fourth will be fought with sticks and stones" , Albert Einstein.
Not sure if you're just trolling here.... But a centripetal force is the one most people call centrifugal. When a body spins (like the earth) it forces the body outward from the centre of rotation. Thus the water of the oceans bulge at the equator. I mentioned my physics background because the original parent of the topic said he wasn't a physicist.
Anyway, gravity isn't a centripetal force. In fact centripetal force isn't even a force, it's an acceleration of mass, equivalent to a force. See Newton's Laws
I am a physicist, and this is the closest you got to the most likely scenario (IMO).
"Some force (moon, internal gravity, spinning of the earth, sun, etc.) is causing the water to accumulate at the equator which in turn reduces the water at the poles. "
Not so much a force, but a lessening of one. The centripetal force of the spinning earth makes the oceans deeper at the equator. The viscosity of the water counters this. The viscosity is lessened with heat. Bingo!
My wife is American. She's been in the UK for 7 years now. She's actually starting to cringe when she hears the American accent, things have got that bad.
Not a day goes by without this kind of madness slapping the whole world in the face. Iran can't have Nukes, but we'll keep building more! Free trade will solve all ills, but we'll subsidise the developing world out of the world market....
OK I'm going to go off topic. But this is madness. The US need to get a grip of themselves. And if you don't like friendly nations telling you this (I'm friendly, I married a yank!), then you will get more unfriendly nations suggesting as much, in far less friendly terms (9/11 the return).
So snap out of it and realise just how important diplomacy, and multilateralism is, before the only card you have to play, is the ace of spades.
This is one of the harshest realities we have to face in the modern world. The more kids you have, the more likely it is you and they will be sick, and or die early from sickness. And then produce more sick babies. This does seem to go against darwin, and therby open the possibility of devolution of the species. Alergies are an indicator of this. Western, wealthy, 'top of the pile' people are much more likely to suffer from allergies. And not just a snifly nose, life threatening conditions, such as asthma. But broaching the issue is difficult, as we quickly get caught up in nature/nurture/Niche/Nazi debates
What about outomatic clustering, akin to Meshnetworks with wifi? Couldn't this give rise to new forms of traffic load sharing? There's so many phones out there! More than surfing surfers possibly?
Bingo. I had a Sony watchman while at boarding school. I loved it. Even though the screen curvered badly in an odd plain and it was in black and white, dispite colour models being available already (though they were still very expencive), what made it so great, was the fact that it got better reception that the TV in the rec room. I still look back on it as one of my top five gadgets of all time.
On visiting the homepage. Just how much spam do you think nathan@okopipi.org gets? Or is this bait?
eitherway I see some BIG problems coming their way, not least, secure distribution of the software. Looks like they've announced this way to soon. Fingers crossed they manage to get a release out and distributed to the masses before their site falls to the enemy
I disagree with whoever modded you off-topic. Shrug.
It seems to happens. My post was partly one aimed at creating debate around the aparrent phenomenon, that wherever Rights are used in an argument, the argument soon looses purpose. Rights assume an absolutism that can not exists in a practical world. We've failed to agree on who or what is or are the originator[s] of the rights being proclaimed by boths sides in the arguments surrounding the article, and the issues it tackles.
The fact is that the laws of the landS are now blurred by the transglobal nature of the web. No government can actually police the web in any meaningful way. The the Right to copy, freely discuss, freely distribute, access, access through special means due to special needs (e.g. disablity), are all too contary to be Rights.
My belief (which I see as relevant to this article) is the if you remove the term right from all of this, we would be able to have more realistic and efficient bebate about the issues at hand. Rights imply laws can be simple and aplied by systematic policing, but means of evading the policing strategies of any law enforcement of any land, are evolving far faster than the laws are being written, yet the laws are still being written too fast to fully assess their impact. 'Rights' are a distraction, and an over simplistic reductionist contruct, dealing with a highly complex sytem, which causes loss of dielectic and logical/rational resolution. But if I'd written that I would have been off topic from the start.;)
Considering the fact that high-quality, free music can be obtained without any sort of DRM cracking, there's really no incentive to crack the iTunes DRM system.
Bingo! This debate is going to go on and on, but as long as I'm more frustrated by DRM stopping/purpacefully hindering me putting what I've bought on my player/pc/mac of choice, then I (along with tens of millions of others)will look to other means of acquiring music.
Every now and again I get heartened that there may be some hope for M$ (e.g. Atlas was a nice idea, and moving with the times), but then something like this comes along and it becomes abundently clear that they are loosing the plot big time.
This may be the case when there's a large number of people wanting tosee the project work, and the insentive to sabotage is small (e.g. this forum), but where the insentive to sabotage if VERY high (millions/billions at stake), and the public interest is limited (although patents are discussed regularly by/.ers very few will trawl the patent archives dayly). A million backlogged patents remember! sO this won't work IMO.
Agreed. The title was an attention grabber, rather than statement of my own beliefs.
And yes to comments lower down, re the linguistic history of the word fittest.
I like your question about what would replace us as the 'highest' organism if we went. It highlights the ridiculousness of the construct. You also touch on why. Although we believe we have higher/greater merit than other organisms, because we are 'aware on such a sophisticated level'. However, this is simply a delusion. IF we were so aware, we would not trash our own environment. Sustainability would be the first thing a truly insightful species would focus its energies on. But despite 100 billion liters of water that fell on New Orleans, despite the models of climate change, despite the evidence of those models being born out in observed climate changes, despite glaciers vanishing in Greenland, despite wars being fought for a resource of finite supply... we, like all animals, choose the uses our so called intelligence to react against immediate environmental conditions, and pander to our base personal instincts. I'm unnecessarily burning carbon as I write this.
So, are we higher. No. We're apes. With complex living behaviors and sophisticated communication techniques.
Is evolution predictable? YES! - and no. Evolution will happen in the correct environment. Anyone who has developed a genetic algorithm will tell you, stuff does happen. And always will. You can be sure of it. What you can't predict, is exactly what will become the dominant genus. Unless the system is very simple, and your brain/predictive model suitable big and good at modeling the system in question. But this is rare. Even making generalizations is not so easy. What if the bacteria that survived this highly contrived experiment were the one that grow small enough to escape the container that was being heated, for example. Life, as Geoff Goldbloom said, finds a way. Not necessarily the way you expect it to.
I believe Darwin's comments have often been missunderstood because of an unfortunate choice of words. Evolution doesn't rely on the survival of the fittest, but of the most sustainable. If the mutant variants can sustain themselve they will survive, and be the DeFacto higher organism. Those that can't, don't, and become history.
Fittest suggests that you must be 'more' something. Stronger, faster, smarter,... But this is not necessarily the case. Bacteria will almost certainly outlive humankind, for example.
It's likely that no self respecting civilisation would ever THINK about using the electromagnetic spectrum to communicate with, and it seems likely (to me at least) that all emerging civilisations will go through an electromagnetic "phase" until they find gravity waves, or FTL comms. This being the case, we'll never intercept ANY radio waves at all from aliens.
Aliens of any notable intelligence would use neutrinos to communicate, as they pass through just about anything, unhindered. Of course that includes puny man made detectors. Also many ultra short/long wave regions of the spectrum are not being whatched by SETI, and these are the more sensible wave lengths to use (as long as you are impervious to such radiation, which is likely for aliens, as the earth is notable for its lack of such radiation occurring naturally in the environment we have evolved in.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, apart from the french thing, none of that made sense to me. Especially the bit about intel. Are you serious or just trolling (if the latter I'm afraid this is my last post on this thread). It was quite clearly Bush's wish many years ago to invade Iraq Intel or no. If we fed false intel then I doubt Bush would be so chummy with Blair (who really should know better - as he has at least half a brain).
The news here is definitely as I described, the news there (when I was there last) was as I described, and the news on Fox.com is as I describe. I'm not saying your experience is invalid, just that I don't understand what you're trying to say. And after you insulted my wife, I'm churlishly reticent to put much effort in to doing so.
Anyway good luck over there. I sincerely hope you see passed the madness.
Its delightful of you to refer to my wife as 'a disgusting person'. Though I'm not entirely sure you know her. However, my point was not that she 'hates America' because she doesn't. Its her home and her parent's home. What she hates is the unending misery that we (the rest of the world) receive daily, commonly referred to as world news. We get American commentators telling, not suggesting to, us that we must live by their policies. That the US Government is the moral saviour of the world, that capitalism, left unchecked, will bring prosperity to all, that Islamists are evil, that Communism is evil, that China is our enemy, that liberalism is bad, that Bush is a great man, that communist states spy on their citizens and are therefor even more evil (suggesting US doesn't), that mental torture for years on end, without legal representation is fine, as long as unelected bodies deem those tortured to be 'a threat', that global warming isn't happening, and that if it is, its China's fault, that 'things like this will happen in the heat of war' when children are executed by US soldiers, inmates are sexually assaulted etc... etc..., that invading a country because they might have WMD is fine, despite being the world's leading creator, producer and distributor of WMD, that when tortured captives finally kill themselves, that their suicides are a calculated act of war, that Bush was fairly elected, as long as he and his chums get to decide what 'fairly' is, that Palestine's elected government is not legitimate, but that Iraq's militarily imposed leaders are, that... Believe me I could go on all day, every day, for months. Not one of these assertions is wholly true (despite being sold as God's own sentiment). In fact most of these are outright lies. And when there is one thing that links each one, like Pavlov's dogs, we begin to associate the lies with the connecting experience. Each of these stomach churning untruths is first espoused via a Washington accent.
So now, even when the accent is simply telling us about Angelina Jolie's latest bundle of joy, she, like so many others around the world, cringes. Half expecting to be told that Brad Pit will shortly be appointed Mayer of London, by Bush himself, or that the Lemmington Spar, Women's Institute has been declared a member of the access of evil, we recoil from the screen/speaker.
As for 'But Iran is a nut job'! Believe me, the whole world is united in it's belief of which country is the biggest scariest nut job going, and despite its numerous shortcomings Iran isn't it.
No The UK isn't perfect, but its a century or so since 'we' (obviously I wasn't around then) took it upon 'ourselves' to tell the rest of the world what to do and how to do it. And like Germany, Spain, Italy, France, Holland, Sweden, and the numerous other post Imperialist nations of the world, we learnt our lesson. The difference is, if the US has to learn its lesson the hard way, then there may not be a world left at the end of it.
'I don't know [what weapons the 3rd world war will be fought with], but the fourth will be fought with sticks and stones" , Albert Einstein.
Not sure if you're just trolling here.... But a centripetal force is the one most people call centrifugal. When a body spins (like the earth) it forces the body outward from the centre of rotation. Thus the water of the oceans bulge at the equator. I mentioned my physics background because the original parent of the topic said he wasn't a physicist.
Anyway, gravity isn't a centripetal force. In fact centripetal force isn't even a force, it's an acceleration of mass, equivalent to a force. See Newton's Laws
I am a physicist, and this is the closest you got to the most likely scenario (IMO).
"Some force (moon, internal gravity, spinning of the earth, sun, etc.) is causing the water to accumulate at the equator which in turn reduces the water at the poles. "
Not so much a force, but a lessening of one. The centripetal force of the spinning earth makes the oceans deeper at the equator. The viscosity of the water counters this. The viscosity is lessened with heat. Bingo!
My exact sentiments!
My wife is American. She's been in the UK for 7 years now. She's actually starting to cringe when she hears the American accent, things have got that bad.
Not a day goes by without this kind of madness slapping the whole world in the face. Iran can't have Nukes, but we'll keep building more! Free trade will solve all ills, but we'll subsidise the developing world out of the world market....
OK I'm going to go off topic. But this is madness. The US need to get a grip of themselves. And if you don't like friendly nations telling you this (I'm friendly, I married a yank!), then you will get more unfriendly nations suggesting as much, in far less friendly terms (9/11 the return).
So snap out of it and realise just how important diplomacy, and multilateralism is, before the only card you have to play, is the ace of spades.
Now I'm not saying we won't get our hair mussed....
This is one of the harshest realities we have to face in the modern world. The more kids you have, the more likely it is you and they will be sick, and or die early from sickness. And then produce more sick babies. This does seem to go against darwin, and therby open the possibility of devolution of the species. Alergies are an indicator of this. Western, wealthy, 'top of the pile' people are much more likely to suffer from allergies. And not just a snifly nose, life threatening conditions, such as asthma. But broaching the issue is difficult, as we quickly get caught up in nature/nurture/Niche /Nazi debates
Don't won't commercials, try the BBC. Think its only got bad music, look around, try BBC Radio 6. Its all free.
What about outomatic clustering, akin to Meshnetworks with wifi? Couldn't this give rise to new forms of traffic load sharing? There's so many phones out there! More than surfing surfers possibly?
Just a thought.
So? Does this mean anything. She could be allied or bitter, or a mix of the two as an ex-employee.
Bingo. I had a Sony watchman while at boarding school. I loved it. Even though the screen curvered badly in an odd plain and it was in black and white, dispite colour models being available already (though they were still very expencive), what made it so great, was the fact that it got better reception that the TV in the rec room. I still look back on it as one of my top five gadgets of all time.
Whats the difference between this and shackles? Sure the shackles chaif more, but the principle's the same.
On visiting the homepage. Just how much spam do you think nathan@okopipi.org gets? Or is this bait?
eitherway I see some BIG problems coming their way, not least, secure distribution of the software. Looks like they've announced this way to soon. Fingers crossed they manage to get a release out and distributed to the masses before their site falls to the enemy
This could suggest the magnetic influence of another body (not withstanding the obvious lack of data issue). e.g. : this kinda thing
Will I be able to park my flying car on windows?
I disagree with whoever modded you off-topic. Shrug.
;)
It seems to happens. My post was partly one aimed at creating debate around the aparrent phenomenon, that wherever Rights are used in an argument, the argument soon looses purpose. Rights assume an absolutism that can not exists in a practical world. We've failed to agree on who or what is or are the originator[s] of the rights being proclaimed by boths sides in the arguments surrounding the article, and the issues it tackles.
The fact is that the laws of the landS are now blurred by the transglobal nature of the web. No government can actually police the web in any meaningful way. The the Right to copy, freely discuss, freely distribute, access, access through special means due to special needs (e.g. disablity), are all too contary to be Rights.
My belief (which I see as relevant to this article) is the if you remove the term right from all of this, we would be able to have more realistic and efficient bebate about the issues at hand. Rights imply laws can be simple and aplied by systematic policing, but means of evading the policing strategies of any law enforcement of any land, are evolving far faster than the laws are being written, yet the laws are still being written too fast to fully assess their impact. 'Rights' are a distraction, and an over simplistic reductionist contruct, dealing with a highly complex sytem, which causes loss of dielectic and logical/rational resolution. But if I'd written that I would have been off topic from the start.
I'm not an anarchist But, who exactly ordains us with rights?
...will I be able to use it in my flying car?
Considering the fact that high-quality, free music can be obtained without any sort of DRM cracking, there's really no incentive to crack the iTunes DRM system.
Bingo! This debate is going to go on and on, but as long as I'm more frustrated by DRM stopping/purpacefully hindering me putting what I've bought on my player/pc/mac of choice, then I (along with tens of millions of others)will look to other means of acquiring music.
Every now and again I get heartened that there may be some hope for M$ (e.g. Atlas was a nice idea, and moving with the times), but then something like this comes along and it becomes abundently clear that they are loosing the plot big time.
This may be the case when there's a large number of people wanting tosee the project work, and the insentive to sabotage is small (e.g. this forum), but where the insentive to sabotage if VERY high (millions/billions at stake), and the public interest is limited (although patents are discussed regularly by /.ers very few will trawl the patent archives dayly). A million backlogged patents remember! sO this won't work IMO.
Agreed. The title was an attention grabber, rather than statement of my own beliefs.
And yes to comments lower down, re the linguistic history of the word fittest.
I like your question about what would replace us as the 'highest' organism if we went. It highlights the ridiculousness of the construct. You also touch on why. Although we believe we have higher/greater merit than other organisms, because we are 'aware on such a sophisticated level'. However, this is simply a delusion. IF we were so aware, we would not trash our own environment. Sustainability would be the first thing a truly insightful species would focus its energies on. But despite 100 billion liters of water that fell on New Orleans, despite the models of climate change, despite the evidence of those models being born out in observed climate changes, despite glaciers vanishing in Greenland, despite wars being fought for a resource of finite supply... we, like all animals, choose the uses our so called intelligence to react against immediate environmental conditions, and pander to our base personal instincts. I'm unnecessarily burning carbon as I write this.
So, are we higher. No. We're apes. With complex living behaviors and sophisticated communication techniques.
Is evolution predictable? YES! - and no. Evolution will happen in the correct environment. Anyone who has developed a genetic algorithm will tell you, stuff does happen. And always will. You can be sure of it. What you can't predict, is exactly what will become the dominant genus. Unless the system is very simple, and your brain/predictive model suitable big and good at modeling the system in question. But this is rare. Even making generalizations is not so easy. What if the bacteria that survived this highly contrived experiment were the one that grow small enough to escape the container that was being heated, for example. Life, as Geoff Goldbloom said, finds a way. Not necessarily the way you expect it to.
However, hypothermiophilic bacteria have evolved over millions of years, not two semesters.
I believe Darwin's comments have often been missunderstood because of an unfortunate choice of words. Evolution doesn't rely on the survival of the fittest, but of the most sustainable. If the mutant variants can sustain themselve they will survive, and be the DeFacto higher organism. Those that can't, don't, and become history.
... But this is not necessarily the case. Bacteria will almost certainly outlive humankind, for example.
Fittest suggests that you must be 'more' something. Stronger, faster, smarter,
I didn't say I was an intelligent alien. ;)
Good point well raised
It's likely that no self respecting civilisation would ever THINK about using the electromagnetic spectrum to communicate with, and it seems likely (to me at least) that all emerging civilisations will go through an electromagnetic "phase" until they find gravity waves, or FTL comms. This being the case, we'll never intercept ANY radio waves at all from aliens.
Aliens of any notable intelligence would use neutrinos to communicate, as they pass through just about anything, unhindered. Of course that includes puny man made detectors. Also many ultra short/long wave regions of the spectrum are not being whatched by SETI, and these are the more sensible wave lengths to use (as long as you are impervious to such radiation, which is likely for aliens, as the earth is notable for its lack of such radiation occurring naturally in the environment we have evolved in.