You will find that many problems can be solved by "fighting fire with fire".
Literally, controlled burnings and backfires can be used to stop forest fires. Cancer-causing agents such as X-Rays, BrdU, Taxol, and Thalidomide can be used in chemotherapy to kill cancer. Immunizations often use attenuated pathogens to build up body's immunity to the real thing. Even cities have to at times be destroyed in order to save them.
Translation: this keyboard is for pussies that are too thick to learn touch-typing or are lazy enough to remember a few shortcuts.
And watch out where you brag about your new Optimus: a programmer/graphics designer that cannot touch-type/remeber photoshop shotcuts is not an employee worth keeping.
One thing missing in this thread is newies bitching about difficulty of Emacs.
Rich, well-fed people do not drive revolutions. On the other hand, if you are hungry, cannot get a job, live on the street, cannot cloth your kids... in short, if you have nothing to lose, then all the freedom and democracy in the world will not abate your unrest.
So the fact that China becomes prosperous is a very good news for the Dear Leaders. And very bad for our military.
Get real. The first order of business for NK-ans should be getting some food and some freedom.
Owning a tunable radio receiver (as opposed to the one with only the DearLeader presets) is a crime in North Korea. Computers/internet access, as nice as that sounds, just isn't an option.
If you live in one of these countries, you can either vote to change things, or (if that fails), pretend to let the Wookie win... As Han Solo said to Lea in the Return of the Jedi, "a backdoor sounds like a great idea"
Abel: dead (in his 20s), no surviving descendants Einstein: dead, no surviving descendants Mozart: dead, no surviving descendants Newton: dead, no surviving descendants Nietzsche: dead, no surviving descendants Curie couple: dead; their smart daugther (how also got a Nobel), also dead, niether have any currently surviving descendants Leibniz: dead, no surviving descendants Gregor Mendel: dead, no surviving descendants Oppenheimer and most of the MP scientists: dead, no surviving descendants
So, if it's good to be smart, how come all the smart guys and their progeny are all dead?
Blastocyst is life. But you can borrow a cell or two from inside the blastocyst, without actually hurting it. Just like I can borrow some of your cells by swabbing your cheek or scratching your hand with a fingernail.
You believe the right thing, but your lack of understanding of basic concepts gives the rest of the believers a bad name.
You come off as an ignorant kook when you say things like "The scientific truth is that cloning generates human life." What you mean to say is "Creating embryos generates life", or "Cloning viable human embryos generates life", or "Life begins at conception"
In biology, "cloning" just means making copies of cells such as skin cells. Your own body in your lifetime, will produce about 10^18 clones. These clones are different from the embryo clones.
And it is, indeed, possible, to make "clones" without creating or destroying human life.
Also, it is possible (though not easy) to derive stem cells without aborting or otherwise destroying an embryo. We can borrow one of embryo's cells, and use that for experiments. It is harder to do that than just destroying the whole embryo, but that is why we need MORE money for stem cell research, not less.
There is nothing wrong with their teeth, other than that some poor Southern people use a certain type of home-made drugs, leading to what is called a "meth mouth".
Hawkings understands quantum physics better than I. Kasparov plays chess better than I. Bush is a better leader than I. Mother Theresa had a better personality than I. Jenna Jamesson has better breasts than I.
Because you cannot extract research grants by proposing to install, say, a bunch of old galvanometers or something?
On the same note, the biologists can cure Cancer, HIV, hepatitis, Parkinsons', and the spinal cord injuries. Well, the "technology is almost available", but we need some money and a few years to complete the research... Which is actually true.
Then perhaps you can inform me what a blastocyst IS if not a human life?
I happen to be one of the believers, so for me, it IS human. For other "believers", some humans (e.g. civilians in Iraq) seem to be worth a lot less than other humans (the embryos), which puzzled me.
It makes perfect sense that that the believers are against stem cell research, since they consider blastocysts a human life, and their destruction a murder.
Yet those very same men seem to be O.K. with 44,000 dead civilians in Iraq in the name of a Greater Good (namely Democracy); many of the victims are children.
Why is it OK to destroy life in Iraq but not in a Petri dish? Did the Bible say anything about loving a fetus but hating a child?
The real problem is who do you want to be in charge of the country.
Democrats have this way of penalizing success with higher taxes and murderous business regulations. They also completely miss that China is an emerging problem that will bite us in the ass soon enough (unless we control the natural resources/oil needed for their economy).
The Democrats would also close the borders to the point where we would not be able to bring in the needed skills, instead opting to give amnesty to millions of high-school dropouts already here (and sending the foreign PhDs to EU/China).
Since reality does have a liberal bias, in a fair election the Democrats would surely win (and America would surely lose). If we need a little vote tampering to do the right thing and have the Republicans in charge, so be it!
err... voter-verifiable paper trail? say, a dot-matrix in a plexiglass box... um, which line-feeds your record out of sight once you are, you know, did done verifying?
there, tool all of 12 seconds to come up with that. And you are telling me a multibillion-dollar behemoth could not imprement auditing of any sort?
Let me make it real easy for you: the majority party gets all the chairmanships and the subpoena powers, and a large I-strick. By voting either candidate (D or R), you give either party the absolute power.
If you want Congressional investigations into Iraq intelligence & strategy & war profiteering & gas prices, vote Democrat.
If you like the way things are, how your taxes are lower and how we have not lost any American lives to terror since 911, vote for Republicans.
Fair enough? Now personally, I would say that if you want terrorists to win, vote Democrats, but that's just me.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
You will find that many problems can be solved by "fighting fire with fire".
Literally, controlled burnings and backfires can be used to stop forest fires.
Cancer-causing agents such as X-Rays, BrdU, Taxol, and Thalidomide can be used in chemotherapy to kill cancer.
Immunizations often use attenuated pathogens to build up body's immunity to the real thing.
Even cities have to at times be destroyed in order to save them.
Translation: this keyboard is for pussies that are too thick to learn touch-typing or are lazy enough to remember a few shortcuts.
And watch out where you brag about your new Optimus: a programmer/graphics designer that cannot touch-type/remeber photoshop shotcuts is not an employee worth keeping.
One thing missing in this thread is newies bitching about difficulty of Emacs.
You are wrong (I think).
Rich, well-fed people do not drive revolutions. On the other hand, if you are hungry, cannot get a job, live on the street, cannot cloth your kids... in short, if you have nothing to lose, then all the freedom and democracy in the world will not abate your unrest.
So the fact that China becomes prosperous is a very good news for the Dear Leaders. And very bad for our military.
My pretty brain is scarred for life now. FUck you.
What could be more important than allowing people to make loud noises while playing with themselves out in public.
(sorry)
Get real. The first order of business for NK-ans should be getting some food and some freedom.
Owning a tunable radio receiver (as opposed to the one with only the DearLeader presets) is a crime in North Korea. Computers/internet access, as nice as that sounds, just isn't an option.
If you live in one of these countries, you can either vote to change things, or (if that fails), pretend to let the Wookie win...
As Han Solo said to Lea in the Return of the Jedi, "a backdoor sounds like a great idea"
Bigots are funny.
2^24 comments should be enough for anybody
At last, the routers in charge of series of tubes will be powered by a discharge from a series of tubes... And a septic tank truck!
Smart guys don't do so well:
Abel: dead (in his 20s), no surviving descendants
Einstein: dead, no surviving descendants
Mozart: dead, no surviving descendants
Newton: dead, no surviving descendants
Nietzsche: dead, no surviving descendants
Curie couple: dead; their smart daugther (how also got a Nobel), also dead, niether have any currently surviving descendants
Leibniz: dead, no surviving descendants
Gregor Mendel: dead, no surviving descendants
Oppenheimer and most of the MP scientists: dead, no surviving descendants
So, if it's good to be smart, how come all the smart guys and their progeny are all dead?
Blastocyst is life. But you can borrow a cell or two from inside the blastocyst, without actually hurting it. Just like I can borrow some of your cells by swabbing your cheek or scratching your hand with a fingernail.
You believe the right thing, but your lack of understanding of basic concepts gives the rest of the believers a bad name.
You come off as an ignorant kook when you say things like "The scientific truth is that cloning generates human life."
What you mean to say is "Creating embryos generates life", or "Cloning viable human embryos generates life", or "Life begins at conception"
In biology, "cloning" just means making copies of cells such as skin cells. Your own body in your lifetime, will produce about 10^18 clones. These clones are different from the embryo clones.
And it is, indeed, possible, to make "clones" without creating or destroying human life.
Also, it is possible (though not easy) to derive stem cells without aborting or otherwise destroying an embryo. We can borrow one of embryo's cells, and use that for experiments. It is harder to do that than just destroying the whole embryo, but that is why we need MORE money for stem cell research, not less.
There is nothing wrong with their teeth, other than that some poor Southern people use a certain type of home-made drugs, leading to what is called a "meth mouth".
Very sad actually.
Better in what way?
Hawkings understands quantum physics better than I.
Kasparov plays chess better than I.
Bush is a better leader than I.
Mother Theresa had a better personality than I.
Jenna Jamesson has better breasts than I.
Do some of these deserve to live more than I?
Because you cannot extract research grants by proposing to install, say, a bunch of old galvanometers or something?
On the same note, the biologists can cure Cancer, HIV, hepatitis, Parkinsons', and the spinal cord injuries. Well, the "technology is almost available", but we need some money and a few years to complete the research...
Which is actually true.
Considering the Brits get free health insurance and free college education, extra tax makes sense.
And those who don't like it over in England, they come to live over here, so everybody wins.
I happen to be one of the believers, so for me, it IS human. For other "believers", some humans (e.g. civilians in Iraq) seem to be worth a lot less than other humans (the embryos), which puzzled me.
And the truckers are entitled to their jobs precisely how? Because they voted Republican?
It makes perfect sense that that the believers are against stem cell research, since they consider blastocysts a human life, and their destruction a murder.
Yet those very same men seem to be O.K. with 44,000 dead civilians in Iraq in the name of a Greater Good (namely Democracy); many of the victims are children.
Why is it OK to destroy life in Iraq but not in a Petri dish? Did the Bible say anything about loving a fetus but hating a child?
The real problem is who do you want to be in charge of the country.
Democrats have this way of penalizing success with higher taxes and murderous business regulations. They also completely miss that China is an emerging problem that will bite us in the ass soon enough (unless we control the natural resources/oil needed for their economy).
The Democrats would also close the borders to the point where we would not be able to bring in the needed skills, instead opting to give amnesty to millions of high-school dropouts already here (and sending the foreign PhDs to EU/China).
Since reality does have a liberal bias, in a fair election the Democrats would surely win (and America would surely lose). If we need a little vote tampering to do the right thing and have the Republicans in charge, so be it!
err... voter-verifiable paper trail? say, a dot-matrix in a plexiglass box... um, which line-feeds your record out of sight once you are, you know, did done verifying?
there, tool all of 12 seconds to come up with that. And you are telling me a multibillion-dollar behemoth could not imprement auditing of any sort?
Do we have HBO's permission to do that? (downloading/saving rather than streaming)?
itsatrap!
Let me make it real easy for you: the majority party gets all the chairmanships and the subpoena powers, and a large I-strick. By voting either candidate (D or R), you give either party the absolute power.
;-)
If you want Congressional investigations into Iraq intelligence & strategy & war profiteering & gas prices, vote Democrat.
If you like the way things are, how your taxes are lower and how we have not lost any American lives to terror since 911, vote for Republicans.
Fair enough? Now personally, I would say that if you want terrorists to win, vote Democrats, but that's just me.
How about a short course of bash to go with those Trojans, Susy?
You will get to practice unzip, touch, finger, grep, strip, mount. And last but not least, fsck, dump and sleep