This is not nanotechnology because nanotech is based on the concept of replacable parts. Every carbon atom is replacable by any other carbon atom. Every lithium atom, with all it's electrochemical properties is replacable by any other lithium atom. Atoms are treated as parts of an assembly. When you make machines that are just small or in the nanometer range without using atoms are replacable parts, you're not using nanotechnology.
I sometimes walk to the gym with my gym clothes (no pockets) and no photo id or wallet. That wouldn't be possible if you had to have id papers with you by law. I don't like carrying a wallet when I'm jogging either.
I've always thought that teachers disliked the usage of Wikipedia because it doesn't teach people how to research from multiple sources. I had classes where we weren't allowed to use encyclopedias for that reason and had to use only books so that we could cite them with footnotes. If you learn that, then you can learn to create Wikipedia articles rather than just get information from them. (seeder vs. leacher)
Most textbooks are closed in the sense of copyrighted. You can't copy them, use parts of them to make derived works, modify them in any way without approval of the publisher. If these textbooks are open source, then all that should be all right to do. That's the main distinction I see. Maybe California wants to be able to easily modify existing textbooks as more research alters our view of reality rather than having to rewrite them completely with new layouts, pictures, covers, etc. Maybe they don't want to have their textbooks dictated to by other states' standards such as Texas which is what textbooks set their standards to and then other states have to live with what Texas wants in their curriculum.
Yes, there is an upper limit to the size of insects due to their respiration. They breathe through their skin via osmosis and not via lungs. So if they grow too big, the central part of their body doesn't get oxygen. However, these are spiders we are talking about (not insects), and I don't think this applies to arachnids.
There was a dinosaur discussion a while back on slashdot in which someone was saying the reason that insects were so large back then (before dinosaurs I think) was because the oxygen concentration was higher at the time.
You could use the same argument against raising teachers' pay against any profession, say medical. I've known quite a few doctors, some personally, who are in it just because of the money, rather than because they like to heal people. I've also known a few that like to be healers. You get that in any profession, that people will go into it because of the money they think they can make rather than because they like that field. The low paying jobs like janitorial, landscaping pay so low because there are people that are willing to work those low paying jobs because they can't get anything else. You have that same problem with teaching in that there are some that are doing it because they can't do any other kind of job. It's to replace those people with ones that are greedy that is the modest goal of raising the pay.
Maybe the price of hair would go up, but then I can also see haircuts becoming free or even money flowing the other way to patrons at hairbanks that hire barbers.
I think you are equating lack of participation in the Iraq War to losing it. People that wanted the US to pull out of Iraq didn't necessarily see that as losing it. Fighting the war and then not achieving the stated goals (removing Saddam, WMDs, winning hearts and minds) would be 'losing' in that context. Else you could say the US lost the race to socialism or failed to achieve a monarchy.
That unilateral decision (2 of you being on a team) is the point of the problem. Deciding this is equivalent to the strategy of cooperation rather than defection.
It's Apr 29 in UK, and May 1 in the US. If it was timezones, then it would have to be the other way around as in Apr 30 in US and May 1 in UK, and it wouldn't be 2 days apart (just 1). And wtf, it's not going to be Friday on 2 different dates just cause of time zones, we use the same calendar!
In the commonwealth states (that used to be part of the British empire), there is the queen's representative, the governor general. The governor general is the one that dissolves parliament when a minority government loses a vote of confidence and then a new parliament election has to take place. At the end of 2008, the governor general in Canada locked the doors of parliament rather than allow a new election, which was within her power. The office is not an elected office, but is appointed, and then authorized by the queen of England. So the queen wields some small power in all the countries that are part of the British commonwealth, rather than just England.
Often, allowing people to 'be willing' to do something can work against them. If an employee is willing to be sexually harassed for example, then others are being biased against (and may be looked over in time of promotion). That is why lunch breaks are mandatory and the law does not state lunch breaks only for those that want them.
That's the supposed reasoning behind why a child doesn't have the legal option to be willing, lest they become victim to coercion and decide to not press charges. Some laws become powerless if the ones they are meant to protect have the option to waive that protection. Thus 'do it by their own free will', even though is a factor here, cannot be taken for granted by the law as an exception, except in a case by case basis or you open the door to prostitution (where illegal) and blackmail.
There are several solutions to fixing the job loss due to automation. Reducing legal work hours down from 8 to 6 or even 4 hours a day without cutting yearly wages would mean more people employed. Another would be to increase unemployment taxes on industry in general and increasing unemployment benefits, but this is not a method I prefer.
He said that ("If I have seen further, it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants.") because he was being a wiseguy. Leibnitz was short, mayhaps a dwarf, and accused Newton of copying his work, and Newton was making a crack about his height while denying it.
While your view is technically correct, knowing how to experiment is far less useful than knowing the accumulated knowledge from experiments already completed in the past. If everyone had to experiment to verify the existence of germs or gravity, we'd get no further in scientific knowledge than what can be learned from scratch in a person's lifetime. It's more important to know that hotter air rises over cold air as information to utilize in daily life. Of course, if you're researching new science, then it's a different ballgame, but then this article isn't talking about you. There is too much accumulated knowledge to be able to test everything that's already been tested by others and this is witnessed by people that take medicine that a doctor tells them has already been tested by others, instead of having everyone use scientific theory to validate that a medicine will work on them by testing it on their pet dog. There comes a time when you have to trust your society or government to have done the scientific research and just tell you the result instead of everyone having to do it.
Slashdot Mirror
It's called the 'No True Scotsman' fallacy.
Person 1: No libertarian would want this.
Person 2: I'm a libertarian, and I want this.
Person 1: No _true_ libertarian would want this.
This is not nanotechnology because nanotech is based on the concept of replacable parts. Every carbon atom is replacable by any other carbon atom. Every lithium atom, with all it's electrochemical properties is replacable by any other lithium atom. Atoms are treated as parts of an assembly. When you make machines that are just small or in the nanometer range without using atoms are replacable parts, you're not using nanotechnology.
Cell towers only have enough backup juice for 6 hours without power. Landlines will stay up for 48 hours.
Hulu doesn't help you when you are not in the US. A dvr does.
I sometimes walk to the gym with my gym clothes (no pockets) and no photo id or wallet. That wouldn't be possible if you had to have id papers with you by law. I don't like carrying a wallet when I'm jogging either.
I've always thought that teachers disliked the usage of Wikipedia because it doesn't teach people how to research from multiple sources. I had classes where we weren't allowed to use encyclopedias for that reason and had to use only books so that we could cite them with footnotes. If you learn that, then you can learn to create Wikipedia articles rather than just get information from them. (seeder vs. leacher)
Most textbooks are closed in the sense of copyrighted. You can't copy them, use parts of them to make derived works, modify them in any way without approval of the publisher. If these textbooks are open source, then all that should be all right to do. That's the main distinction I see. Maybe California wants to be able to easily modify existing textbooks as more research alters our view of reality rather than having to rewrite them completely with new layouts, pictures, covers, etc. Maybe they don't want to have their textbooks dictated to by other states' standards such as Texas which is what textbooks set their standards to and then other states have to live with what Texas wants in their curriculum.
Yes, there is an upper limit to the size of insects due to their respiration. They breathe through their skin via osmosis and not via lungs. So if they grow too big, the central part of their body doesn't get oxygen. However, these are spiders we are talking about (not insects), and I don't think this applies to arachnids.
There was a dinosaur discussion a while back on slashdot in which someone was saying the reason that insects were so large back then (before dinosaurs I think) was because the oxygen concentration was higher at the time.
You could use the same argument against raising teachers' pay against any profession, say medical. I've known quite a few doctors, some personally, who are in it just because of the money, rather than because they like to heal people. I've also known a few that like to be healers. You get that in any profession, that people will go into it because of the money they think they can make rather than because they like that field. The low paying jobs like janitorial, landscaping pay so low because there are people that are willing to work those low paying jobs because they can't get anything else. You have that same problem with teaching in that there are some that are doing it because they can't do any other kind of job. It's to replace those people with ones that are greedy that is the modest goal of raising the pay.
Maybe the price of hair would go up, but then I can also see haircuts becoming free or even money flowing the other way to patrons at hairbanks that hire barbers.
I think you are equating lack of participation in the Iraq War to losing it. People that wanted the US to pull out of Iraq didn't necessarily see that as losing it. Fighting the war and then not achieving the stated goals (removing Saddam, WMDs, winning hearts and minds) would be 'losing' in that context. Else you could say the US lost the race to socialism or failed to achieve a monarchy.
This is a strawman.
That unilateral decision (2 of you being on a team) is the point of the problem. Deciding this is equivalent to the strategy of cooperation rather than defection.
There's a Godel joke in there, somewhere.
I remember playing multiplayer (via ipx) on doom in 93. I don't remember the details but I remember shooting at them.
It's Apr 29 in UK, and May 1 in the US. If it was timezones, then it would have to be the other way around as in Apr 30 in US and May 1 in UK, and it wouldn't be 2 days apart (just 1). And wtf, it's not going to be Friday on 2 different dates just cause of time zones, we use the same calendar!
In the commonwealth states (that used to be part of the British empire), there is the queen's representative, the governor general. The governor general is the one that dissolves parliament when a minority government loses a vote of confidence and then a new parliament election has to take place. At the end of 2008, the governor general in Canada locked the doors of parliament rather than allow a new election, which was within her power. The office is not an elected office, but is appointed, and then authorized by the queen of England. So the queen wields some small power in all the countries that are part of the British commonwealth, rather than just England.
Be funny if you got modded redundant. :)
Often, allowing people to 'be willing' to do something can work against them. If an employee is willing to be sexually harassed for example, then others are being biased against (and may be looked over in time of promotion). That is why lunch breaks are mandatory and the law does not state lunch breaks only for those that want them.
That's the supposed reasoning behind why a child doesn't have the legal option to be willing, lest they become victim to coercion and decide to not press charges. Some laws become powerless if the ones they are meant to protect have the option to waive that protection. Thus 'do it by their own free will', even though is a factor here, cannot be taken for granted by the law as an exception, except in a case by case basis or you open the door to prostitution (where illegal) and blackmail.
You're talking about humans living like pets of the machine overlords. Meow Meow.
Maybe he's a stockbroker and hedging his bets that one or the other is correct.
"Oh my god, you've got NAS!!"
-johnny mnemonic
There are several solutions to fixing the job loss due to automation. Reducing legal work hours down from 8 to 6 or even 4 hours a day without cutting yearly wages would mean more people employed. Another would be to increase unemployment taxes on industry in general and increasing unemployment benefits, but this is not a method I prefer.
He said that ("If I have seen further, it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants.") because he was being a wiseguy. Leibnitz was short, mayhaps a dwarf, and accused Newton of copying his work, and Newton was making a crack about his height while denying it.
While your view is technically correct, knowing how to experiment is far less useful than knowing the accumulated knowledge from experiments already completed in the past. If everyone had to experiment to verify the existence of germs or gravity, we'd get no further in scientific knowledge than what can be learned from scratch in a person's lifetime. It's more important to know that hotter air rises over cold air as information to utilize in daily life. Of course, if you're researching new science, then it's a different ballgame, but then this article isn't talking about you. There is too much accumulated knowledge to be able to test everything that's already been tested by others and this is witnessed by people that take medicine that a doctor tells them has already been tested by others, instead of having everyone use scientific theory to validate that a medicine will work on them by testing it on their pet dog. There comes a time when you have to trust your society or government to have done the scientific research and just tell you the result instead of everyone having to do it.