Comment Re:Easier to prove conclusion wrong (Score 1) 386
Arrgh, typo. Should be Simon Kochen.
Arrgh, typo. Should be Simon Kochen.
If you are so sure it exists, just prove it
It's hard to prove that free will exists [...]
John Conway and Simon Conway, at Princeton IAS, did some work on this: Free Will Theorem. Depending on who you ask, their result is fairly obvious or quite deep.
Conway did a series of video lectures on the subject, see here here.
Exactly. By pushing this Theresa May is ignoring three (!) parliamentary committees.
It has been developed in response to the disclosure of state mass surveillance programmes by the whistleblower Edward Snowden.
So their answer to state mass surveillance programmes is more state mass surveillance programmes?
Of course! Their answer to needle-in-haystack problems is always to add hay.
Funny also how she wants to rush this through, right when everyone is distracted by the Brexit farce. Coincidence? I think not.
Yeah, that's when they were still a "search giant". I am unsure why they are still labeled that in the media. Certainly
They're an advertising giant, and have been for years.
Please read the article before posting:
You must be new here
I'm not sure European unions operate the same way American ones do. For one thing much of Europe doesn't have a political system where influence is correlated to forking over cash to politicians. Not nearly to the same extent anyway. Meaning they get to spend contributions toward collective bargaining.
Having said that, I guess some of the above posts are just reflexive "unions baad" bleats.
1985? Check your code for an off-by-one error. Or is it like a new version; 1984++ or something?
I doubt GP meant this... But there is a novel called 1985. Not all that impressive, I thought, certainly not nearly as good as Clockwork Orange.
-1 karma because slashdot readers are idiots on average
Well, you are doing your best to underline this point, I'll give you that much.
There are countless avenues within U.S. gov't that he could have followed
Really? Name one whistleblower who followed one of those "countless avenues" to any effect, while not having G-men systematically wreck their lives.
Thomas Drake and friends tried, and suffered for it.
I am not liking Capaldi or the new writing though, it just tries too hard to be deep and avant garde anymore.
Have to disagree about Capaldi. Tennant got the right balance of dark and light, but I thought Smith was just all fluff, so I like that Capaldi's Doctor is rougher, grizzly even. But then I was a huge fan of The Thick of It.
The writing, yeah I miss Russell T. Davies. Moffat is clearly a talented writer (I love what he did with Sherlock) but the best episodes of the Who reboot, for me, are basically all Russell. And Torchwood doesn't look like coming back either, I'd probably rate seasons 3 and 4 over all of Who.
Shame Neil Gaiman didn't do more.
Sorry for being thick I suppose... But bringing it to earth presupposes ownership, to me anyway. And by saying it is all right to go get it, congress is making rules about stuff it does not own. No more than anybody else at least.
But they are saying something about ownership by allowing (US) companies to "bring it here" with no regard for other interested parties. Substitute something like Antarctica in the bit you quoted earlier, maybe you'll see what I mean.
I think you may have missed my point; by what right should the US get to allocate ownership of stuff it doesn't own?
"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight
