shut down the malls. turn the land into new neighborhoods, with apartments, coffee shops, gyms, parks, gardens, etc.. move the malls into automated warehouses outside the city were autonomous vehicles pick up packages for delivery to the neighborhoods homes and biz
we may not be able to create flying cars, but we can still create some awesome shit. it's a shame we're held back by outdated ideas of what it means to be a valuable person (wage slave) in the servitude of the wealthy.
Ron Paul isn't mystical at all. He's very easy to understand if you look at his policies, effectively to sell everything tax payers have built to the highest bidder, including national parks, other lands, infrastructure... He's a corporation friendly capitalist. He talks big when it comes to free markets and non-coercion, but if you really consider what would unfold should his policies be put into place, sell everything to the rich, he's a just a crazy white old Texan that doesn't give a toss about people that don't have a lot of wealth.
So what you're saying is, because it's too late to actually prevent any problems, let's just throw up our hands and take no action to mitigate their impact.
Thanks for showing us all how pathetic your religion really is.
You have no idea what I think about climate change.
The point behind my comment was that an anonymous person insisting it's all bad science without offering proof, is not someone anybody should take seriously.
I'm sorry if my humor was too low brow for you. I humbly ask, oh wise one, that you forgive this ignorant pleb for offending you.
A.) What is the societal cost of cataclysmic climate shifts?
B.) If we can stop 50 people from being killed in Chicago, how do we know 50 aren't being killed in a remote desert area?
The answer to A is likely much worse than an answer to 1.
The answer to B and 2 is, just because it may still happen somewhere else where we have no influence doesn't make it a bad idea to take it upon ourselves to act.
Hey, everybody! EverlastingPhelps said it's all just bad science! No need to panic. Things are gonna be just fine. Wow, I'm so glad I still check/. now and then.
Oh damn, how dare we who are creating the mess actually take on the burden of mitigating it. How fucking horrible would it be should we have to drive less! THE HUMANITY! THAT AINT FREEDOM!!
No, best we just push the entire screw up onto the next generations. Let them deal with the fallout of our material greed. Yeah, that's the ticket!
The psychology can be summed up pretty easily: I'm too in love with my way of life, I'll be dead by the time things are serious. So fuck it, why bother.
Let's sit here and bitch about how our luxury goods are going to cost us while ignoring how much it will cost our kids and grandkids to deal with the fucking mess we created.
You seem to have missed the part in your own citation where it says "At the time, permission was neither required nor customarily sought."
Regardless, you've done nothing in this thread but cherrypick details that fit your personal views.
She consented to medical treatment. That is unless you can show someone was holding a gun to her head, since I doubt you were there. In 1951 that was all that was required. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant.
Actually, the Founding Fathers did foresee the issues you mention. Jefferson wrote of fears of aristocracy and corporate power getting in the way of democracy. Maybe not on the scale we see now, but it was definitely a concern.
Unfortunately the rest of the Founding Fathers were the wealthy aristocracy of the day. John Adam's wrote about the role of government being to protect the property of the ownership class (paraphrasing).
It's never mentioned in our public school, where we're primarily fed propaganda about how the Founders were these wise and altruistic creatures that were concerned about freedom for all. While enshrining the right to vote solely in the hands of wealthy, white land owners (ie., them).
Oh, anonymous person on the Internet is such a big tough man. Catch a whiff of that musky manliness. But only a whiff! For should you inhale too deeply, the raw might of their being may overwhelm your soul!
Listen, everyone! You should accept how this person chooses to address YOU. The Cat has obviously shown his superior intellect and grasp of reality. Do not let the display of raw emotion intimidate you. Instead, be in awe of such power unleashed.
This stunning specimen of human perfection deserves... NAY, DEMANDS... your respect and attention. And you will give it to them. For they are... The Cat.
I think it's more we're conditioned to feel that way about our cars, thanks to decades of advertising designed to do so.
The reality is that we have very little control over our driving. Collectively we're spending billions of hours each year stuck in traffic. We burn billions of gallons of gas going nowhere.
Replace that with a largely automated system that can route around traffic issues, reduces the number of cars needed on the road, and you actually return control to folks.
Plus cars are old technology. The younger crowd doesn't really care any more (more and more teens are waiting on getting a license until absolutely necessary). Start advertising automated cars that do the work while you fuck around on your iPad and I think your problem becomes moot.
Typically, "God" is packaged along with afterlife, another chance, eternal existence, etc. Would belief in God then create an implied belief in those other things?
The biggest religions are the ones that offer these things only so long as you follow the rules of their God. If people are told to believe in God without a reason, would this study come to the same conclusion?
Whether to continue supporting a phone is not up to Google. Much of that decision is up to the carriers, then the vendors. Those same folks that want to roll out new devices every 6-12 months.
If a vendor takes Android 4.0 and mods the fuck out of it for their device, is Google responsible for patching all the security problems they introduced? Should Google take on writing new versions of Android for that hacked up version?
I like how you ultimately defend your post by suggesting anyone that disagrees is a clueless rube. Brilliant.
You're blaming Google for what is simply the mess that is the cellphone industry. At least in the U.S..
Anecdotally, I bought a house recently for ~250k. The seller bitched that he was moving due to high taxes. While going through to the motions, we see there is a 200k debt against the house (covered by our 250k). So at some point, on a house he paid 80k for, the seller had gone deep into debt by borrowing against the house. They added to the house, built a very nice detached workshop, bought a collectable Mustang that sat in the garage and a fancy Harley. But taxes were too damn high.
I can think of a dozen family members that have done the same. Bought up property, fancy cars, all on debt and are now up their ass in problems.
It's an oversimplification to suggest that the US Government just needs to fix it's spending habits. It's an institutional problem that extends well beyond Washington DC.
You're assuming enough people will carry to make your point valid. Even if the teachers had the option, you can't assume any of them would have. We all have plenty of options and only so much time and ability to invest in any given set.
Consider what just happened in a busy mall in Clackamas, Oregon. Oregon is a concealed carry state. Even still, a wonk with a machine gun killed people and no one whipped out their piece and took a shot at him. So the idea that allowing the carrying of guns by the average person stops this shit is ridiculous.
You're defending ideas from an era of musket loaders. The 2nd amendment does not at all take into consideration the type of weapons people can get their hands on today.
Slashdot Mirror
shut down the malls. turn the land into new neighborhoods, with apartments, coffee shops, gyms, parks, gardens, etc.. move the malls into automated warehouses outside the city were autonomous vehicles pick up packages for delivery to the neighborhoods homes and biz
we may not be able to create flying cars, but we can still create some awesome shit. it's a shame we're held back by outdated ideas of what it means to be a valuable person (wage slave) in the servitude of the wealthy.
Ron Paul isn't mystical at all. He's very easy to understand if you look at his policies, effectively to sell everything tax payers have built to the highest bidder, including national parks, other lands, infrastructure... He's a corporation friendly capitalist. He talks big when it comes to free markets and non-coercion, but if you really consider what would unfold should his policies be put into place, sell everything to the rich, he's a just a crazy white old Texan that doesn't give a toss about people that don't have a lot of wealth.
So what you're saying is, because it's too late to actually prevent any problems, let's just throw up our hands and take no action to mitigate their impact.
People like you
Because you know me so well...
Thanks for showing us all how pathetic your religion really is.
You have no idea what I think about climate change.
The point behind my comment was that an anonymous person insisting it's all bad science without offering proof, is not someone anybody should take seriously.
I'm sorry if my humor was too low brow for you. I humbly ask, oh wise one, that you forgive this ignorant pleb for offending you.
No, dumbass. I was referring to the nickname of the person I replied to.
Wrong questions:
A.) What is the societal cost of cataclysmic climate shifts?
B.) If we can stop 50 people from being killed in Chicago, how do we know 50 aren't being killed in a remote desert area?
The answer to A is likely much worse than an answer to 1.
The answer to B and 2 is, just because it may still happen somewhere else where we have no influence doesn't make it a bad idea to take it upon ourselves to act.
Hey, everybody! EverlastingPhelps said it's all just bad science! No need to panic. Things are gonna be just fine. Wow, I'm so glad I still check /. now and then.
Thanks, EverlastingPhelps. You've saved us all.
Oh damn, how dare we who are creating the mess actually take on the burden of mitigating it. How fucking horrible would it be should we have to drive less! THE HUMANITY! THAT AINT FREEDOM!!
No, best we just push the entire screw up onto the next generations. Let them deal with the fallout of our material greed. Yeah, that's the ticket!
The psychology can be summed up pretty easily: I'm too in love with my way of life, I'll be dead by the time things are serious. So fuck it, why bother.
Let's sit here and bitch about how our luxury goods are going to cost us while ignoring how much it will cost our kids and grandkids to deal with the fucking mess we created.
couple more....
http://star-made.org/ ... pretty much minecraft in space
http://www.starforge.com/ ... interesting mix of minecraft, halo graphics/combat, supposedly spaceships, though they have yet to ship that
'Itâ(TM)s still exponentially hard, but itâ(TM)s exponentially easier than we thought,' Duffy says.
So, what, rather than a computer taking until the heat death of the universe to crack my 4096 bit key it will only take until our Sun goes super nova?
brb, generating 8192 bit keys.
You seem to have missed the part in your own citation where it says "At the time, permission was neither required nor customarily sought."
Regardless, you've done nothing in this thread but cherrypick details that fit your personal views.
She consented to medical treatment. That is unless you can show someone was holding a gun to her head, since I doubt you were there. In 1951 that was all that was required. Whether you agree with it or not is irrelevant.
Actually, the Founding Fathers did foresee the issues you mention. Jefferson wrote of fears of aristocracy and corporate power getting in the way of democracy. Maybe not on the scale we see now, but it was definitely a concern.
Unfortunately the rest of the Founding Fathers were the wealthy aristocracy of the day. John Adam's wrote about the role of government being to protect the property of the ownership class (paraphrasing).
It's never mentioned in our public school, where we're primarily fed propaganda about how the Founders were these wise and altruistic creatures that were concerned about freedom for all. While enshrining the right to vote solely in the hands of wealthy, white land owners (ie., them).
Quiet, man. You don't want to give them any ideas. Let them die. That's what consumers want.
Oh, anonymous person on the Internet is such a big tough man. Catch a whiff of that musky manliness. But only a whiff! For should you inhale too deeply, the raw might of their being may overwhelm your soul!
Listen, everyone! You should accept how this person chooses to address YOU. The Cat has obviously shown his superior intellect and grasp of reality. Do not let the display of raw emotion intimidate you. Instead, be in awe of such power unleashed.
This stunning specimen of human perfection deserves... NAY, DEMANDS ... your respect and attention. And you will give it to them. For they are... The Cat.
Yeah, like how the FBI was dismantled when the communist witch hunt ended.
Oh wait.
Without more context that is the most useless metric I've ever seen.
Did they find/replace 10,000 typos?
It's called a PC. It has all the same capabilities as this thing, and you can play games going back decades. Enjoy.
I think it's more we're conditioned to feel that way about our cars, thanks to decades of advertising designed to do so.
The reality is that we have very little control over our driving. Collectively we're spending billions of hours each year stuck in traffic. We burn billions of gallons of gas going nowhere.
Replace that with a largely automated system that can route around traffic issues, reduces the number of cars needed on the road, and you actually return control to folks.
Plus cars are old technology. The younger crowd doesn't really care any more (more and more teens are waiting on getting a license until absolutely necessary). Start advertising automated cars that do the work while you fuck around on your iPad and I think your problem becomes moot.
Typically, "God" is packaged along with afterlife, another chance, eternal existence, etc. Would belief in God then create an implied belief in those other things?
The biggest religions are the ones that offer these things only so long as you follow the rules of their God. If people are told to believe in God without a reason, would this study come to the same conclusion?
Shit n hellfire, the article has a big block of text that outlines the specs. If you didn't see it it's because you didn't actually look.
Main Processor
Single-chip custom processor
CPU : x86-64 AMD "Jaguar", 8 cores
GPU : 1.84 TFLOPS, AMD next-generation Radeon based graphics engine
Memory
GDDR5 8GB
Hard Disk Drive
Built-in
Optical Drive (read only)
BD 6xCAV
DVD 8xCAV
I/O
Super-Speed USB (USB 3.0) ãAUX
Communication Ethernet (10BASE-T, 100BASE-TX, 1000BASE-T)
IEEE 802.11 b/g/n
Bluetooth® 2.1 (EDR)
AV output
HDMI
Analog-AV out
Digital Output (optical)
Whether to continue supporting a phone is not up to Google. Much of that decision is up to the carriers, then the vendors. Those same folks that want to roll out new devices every 6-12 months.
If a vendor takes Android 4.0 and mods the fuck out of it for their device, is Google responsible for patching all the security problems they introduced? Should Google take on writing new versions of Android for that hacked up version?
I like how you ultimately defend your post by suggesting anyone that disagrees is a clueless rube. Brilliant.
You're blaming Google for what is simply the mess that is the cellphone industry. At least in the U.S..
All of us balance our own checkbook at the end of every single month, and try our best to live within our means.
Consumer debt is at all time high: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/us-usa-economy-households-idUSBRE88J0X520120920
Anecdotally, I bought a house recently for ~250k. The seller bitched that he was moving due to high taxes. While going through to the motions, we see there is a 200k debt against the house (covered by our 250k). So at some point, on a house he paid 80k for, the seller had gone deep into debt by borrowing against the house. They added to the house, built a very nice detached workshop, bought a collectable Mustang that sat in the garage and a fancy Harley. But taxes were too damn high.
I can think of a dozen family members that have done the same. Bought up property, fancy cars, all on debt and are now up their ass in problems.
It's an oversimplification to suggest that the US Government just needs to fix it's spending habits. It's an institutional problem that extends well beyond Washington DC.
It mentions folks are buying tablets instead. Which you can read on, but also play Angry Birds... oo, or watch Netflix! Reading is boring.
You're assuming enough people will carry to make your point valid. Even if the teachers had the option, you can't assume any of them would have. We all have plenty of options and only so much time and ability to invest in any given set.
Consider what just happened in a busy mall in Clackamas, Oregon. Oregon is a concealed carry state. Even still, a wonk with a machine gun killed people and no one whipped out their piece and took a shot at him. So the idea that allowing the carrying of guns by the average person stops this shit is ridiculous.
You're defending ideas from an era of musket loaders. The 2nd amendment does not at all take into consideration the type of weapons people can get their hands on today.