... It does not effect re productivity and has negligible mortality...
Then, in ecvolutionary terms it is neither beneficial nor detremental.
... Yet it is a clear example of non beneficial mutation that would have started with one birth hundreds of years ago....
It may be detrimental to the individual but if someone with that condition can reproduce before they die, then it is not a detremental mutation.
100 years ago people tended not to live long enough to realise they had the disease. Now that medical science keeps people alive and healthier for longer, we are starting to notice higher instances of such diseases. (Cancer is another example).
... the kind of insight we're talking about here appears at face value to require a long academic tradition.
Which is exactly the kind of tradition that the middle east had at that time (and still do). Well, the parts we haven't bombed back to the stone age at least.
Technically, they can be prosecuted for viewing it. They just never are. It's the same with people that work in Internet cafe's if they catch someone downloading that sort of stuff.
Because we can't sign against a petition, it means that there may well be 29 million who are against the petition (for ID cards) rather than the 29 thousand who are for the petition (against ID cards).
Until people can sign against a petition, we will never know.
Ok, so people have to pass a test to drive a car, but they don't have to understand the inner workings of a clutch or a distributor. Cars are understood on a need-to-know basis. You need to know how to change gears, turn the car, park and understand road sign meanings etc... but you don't need to know how the power is transferred from the steering column to the axle in order to drive.
And so it should be with computers. techie stuff is highly irrelevant to most people. Most people just want to get their job done and get it done fast. They don't care HOW it is done. In fact, going into an explanation would probably send them to sleep.
An X on a piece of paper! It's worked for hundereds of years, and, in this country at least(UK), the result is known around 4 to 5 hours after the polls close.
No, the BBC have a remit, as a public service broadcaster, to inform. They are not pressurised by advertisers to go for viewing figures. (Yes other media outlets do too, but the BBC has the biggest remit to inform rather than merely entertain).
...the ridiculous silencing of Sinn Fein's spokespeople in the 1980s
Ahem, this ban applied to all media outlets in Britain, not just the BBC. It was implemented by the government (wrongly, in my opinion) to try and silence the terrorists at the time. Of course, all it did was draw attention to them as they terrorists were still shown, but with actors voices dubbed over them.
Organizationally it is entirely a part of the government of the United Kingdom.
No it isn't. It is an independent body, nothing to do with the government.
Which is a form of tax, collected by the government and given to its division (the BBC), just like any other tax.
No it isn't. It's a licence fee which you pay to the BBC (not the government) if you own a television. This allows them to be free from advertisers and also free of government control.
If you are wondering why it's important to be free of advertisers, just think about a programme that, say, criticised The Bank of Scotland. Do you think the Bank of Scotland would then advertise with the BBC?
Another aspect of the BBC is that when the Hutton report criticised them, they published the report in full. Do you think the Sun, or any other Murdoch paper woud have done the same?
The BBC isn't funded by the government. It is an independent body, funded by the Television Licence (around 10 pounds per month for anyone that owns a television). This way, they are not beholden to government or to any private body.
The government does appoint some of the governors I think.
However, there was the whole Hutton Report where the government came close to telling the BBC what to do.
Just to expand on what pchan said, the chance of getting all the songs ordered by artist, is just the same as getting any other particular combination of songs.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it was setting IE as the default browser that caused the Monopoly problem,not Office
Then, in ecvolutionary terms it is neither beneficial nor detremental.
It may be detrimental to the individual but if someone with that condition can reproduce before they die, then it is not a detremental mutation.
100 years ago people tended not to live long enough to realise they had the disease. Now that medical science keeps people alive and healthier for longer, we are starting to notice higher instances of such diseases. (Cancer is another example).
Ahem, I'm British.
11/9 and the election of Bush are closely related events anyway.
I second that. Ever since 11/9 it's been like that.
I suspect nothing they did to themselves could get anywhere near "Shock and Awe".
Which is exactly the kind of tradition that the middle east had at that time (and still do). Well, the parts we haven't bombed back to the stone age at least.
Technically, they can be prosecuted for viewing it. They just never are. It's the same with people that work in Internet cafe's if they catch someone downloading that sort of stuff.
Because we can't sign against a petition, it means that there may well be 29 million who are against the petition (for ID cards) rather than the 29 thousand who are for the petition (against ID cards).
Until people can sign against a petition, we will never know.
So, 50/50 then. surely random chance would probably give as good results.
Ok, so people have to pass a test to drive a car, but they don't have to understand the inner workings of a clutch or a distributor. Cars are understood on a need-to-know basis. You need to know how to change gears, turn the car, park and understand road sign meanings etc... but you don't need to know how the power is transferred from the steering column to the axle in order to drive.
And so it should be with computers. techie stuff is highly irrelevant to most people. Most people just want to get their job done and get it done fast. They don't care HOW it is done. In fact, going into an explanation would probably send them to sleep.
RTFA!
Personally, my choice would be OLEDs. Nut there a bit further off.
There are whole scenes in "The Matrix"(TM) that would have to be cut if we didn't have cubicles!
Ok, so this was probably the only post on /. that didn't have a reply with some geeky reference to "The Matrix"(TM), until I posted this.
A spell checker wouldn't have picked that up anyway as both "sighted" and "cited" are valid, correctly spelled English words.
The correct word to use in this context is, in fact, "seen".
Hmm, silencing the opposition. Why does that ring teriffying bells.
An X on a piece of paper! It's worked for hundereds of years, and, in this country at least(UK), the result is known around 4 to 5 hours after the polls close.
No, the BBC have a remit, as a public service broadcaster, to inform. They are not pressurised by advertisers to go for viewing figures. (Yes other media outlets do too, but the BBC has the biggest remit to inform rather than merely entertain).
Yes but I could argue that the daily mail are biased against the BBC.
And therefore the pressure is to entertain, rather than inform.
Ahem, this ban applied to all media outlets in Britain, not just the BBC. It was implemented by the government (wrongly, in my opinion) to try and silence the terrorists at the time. Of course, all it did was draw attention to them as they terrorists were still shown, but with actors voices dubbed over them.
No it isn't. It is an independent body, nothing to do with the government.
No it isn't. It's a licence fee which you pay to the BBC (not the government) if you own a television. This allows them to be free from advertisers and also free of government control.
If you are wondering why it's important to be free of advertisers, just think about a programme that, say, criticised The Bank of Scotland. Do you think the Bank of Scotland would then advertise with the BBC?
Another aspect of the BBC is that when the Hutton report criticised them, they published the report in full. Do you think the Sun, or any other Murdoch paper woud have done the same?
The BBC isn't funded by the government. It is an independent body, funded by the Television Licence (around 10 pounds per month for anyone that owns a television). This way, they are not beholden to government or to any private body.
The government does appoint some of the governors I think.
However, there was the whole Hutton Report where the government came close to telling the BBC what to do.
A cross on a bit of paper.
It's worked here in the UK for 100's of years and the results are back within 12 hours.
Just to expand on what pchan said, the chance of getting all the songs ordered by artist, is just the same as getting any other particular combination of songs.
Call the Prepare() method as has to be done with any language.
It's not the language it's the programmer.