The process of power shifting from a set of hands to another set of hands has happened before many times throughout the course of human history.
Maybe something similar is about to happen again.
http://moneymorning.com/ext/ar...
If this is true, the mystery of why all these countries want these weapons, disappears.
In an extraordinary move, a company that makes use of sacrilegious ways of collaboration using technology and ideas with names such as "open source" or "donationware", such a company seems to have attracted the attention of heretics and infidels whose sole purpose in life is to undermine the Goodness of the Enterprises. With the controversial name of "OwnCloud" they sinfully provide a way to transform any combination of: "free", "Microsoft", "storage service" and "15 GB", into a joke . Some even commit atrocities such as breaking 'politically correct' protocol and laugh right in front of the face of the speaker of these words. How this company has done this is still unknown, but speculation and rumour speak of "local computer OwnCloud instance" and "router/modem port redirection". A certain kind of the geek species even blaspheme with openvpn connections between the hosting company where they keep webpages, and the beforementioned atrocious "local computer OwnCloud instance". Yet, the consensus among the experts about this last bit is that we are dealing with pure fantasy.
Sadly I agree to that. Yet let's be optimistic. After all, we can say we have achieved some level of accuracy when we will boast that yes yes, it is really us, in all respects, that has colonised that world. We come as a package across the Universe.
After reading all comments so far and thinking of the concerns mentioned, printing humans onto another world for colonising purposes is really not a fearful thing to do. I will illustrate the simplicity of it by starting with artificial insemination and sperm donation. There is a sperm pool out of which we draw readymade zoids to fecund with an egg in an ovary, when we determine there is a need to do so. In the end, it all boils down to this bare fact.
Now, many if-s follow.. and we reach a point where if we have a world and if we want to colonise it and it is very close - less than 10ly away - then if we today happen to chose the moment when to 'start' the building of an embryo using readymade zoids and ovaries, can't this moment well enough be when the colony-ship lands on that world?
If we would ever be capable of doing all this sci-fi, we would also be capable to build in advance a home, why, a village, waiting for the coming ocupants.
Otherwise, it is all well and good too. We just stay home.
Considering also the parent post, it would be wiser on his part to quit and leave the dubious still dubious and get on with proper research, rather than step on who knows who might be interested in or is behind the marketing of the dubious results and who could later undermine his proper research. Spoiling somebody's elaborate plan to profit by scientific fallacies, could lead to grudges just because the said fallacy now has been scientifically proven and the profit plan, however elaborate and next-to-perfect, is dead forever.
Wearable devices will not be massively popular unless they will be as simple to use as headphones. Plug and it works and you don't need to think anymore about them.
There are many people I know who dislike bluetooth headphones just because after a while they get tired from sychronising them with the device, finding the proper frequency, there is noise and interference and whatever have you. Or they need something for a special purpose, such as to cheat at an exam hearing through a tiny invisible earplug deep in your ear what someone else at the next room is reading. But for normal people and normal life, either wearable devices will be as simple as switching on the TV, either the producers should really think targeting not "all the people there is" but selected target groups and usage specific audiences.
A completely agree with it. My comment was more to stress the "picnic" part, aka being efficient in the hunt. I was assuming a hunt more to the pleasure in hunting rather than efficiency in providing food. If the later is the case, the same limits about the quantity of hunted game would apply.
I apologize for the confusion in that case.
You can always go hunting for the next can of meat at the nearest super or mini market. You can even fill an entire truck of them and reduce the effort to just a single trip. Not to mention the spices from India, fish from Madagascar and Japanese caviar.
From a subspecies of H.Sapiens with a hig-sigma level of certainty to have difficulties in removing parentheses from an algebraic expression when there is a minus sign before the parenthesis? I do not think so.
Equal airtime from a subgrup of human society as a whole who are intelligent enough to use that same "equal" sign/notion between the words "trust" and "faith"? I don't think so.
Equal airtime from followers of a certain moral-set that basically boils down to a freedom for them to yell all day long near your ear while dismissing your freedom to not listen to them? I don't think so.
Have these degenerate life-forms read books such as "A Brief History of Time"? Or "The Particle at the End of the Universe"? Or "The Genome"? Can they understand what does the results of BICEP2 mean for human knowledge? I don't think so.
I don't mind them barking all day long. I only want them to do it within their own fucking playground. I for one do not give a single hair of my armpit to teach how the world works to people who willingly refuse to do it. Let them rot within the gooey mind-masturbation they chose to live. Just keep them off my own grass!
I can see the different viewpoints of those who say Snowden is a hero, and the others who say he is a villain. It is also a good thing to know that either group does agree that whatever the act of Snowden is labeled, it is a flagrant violation of the Constitution. This is still without getting out of the US worldview of things. If we suddenly 'retreat' a bit more to get into this 'field of view' not only the US, but the World as an entity, the US worldview should learn how to queue.
But my main curiosity is this: We have two computer technology worldwide-known persons, who have expressed different opinions about the Snowden Saga. I wonder, why stop at them alone and not ask any further, how would other world-wide known computer technology persons see this matter? We could ask Larry Wall, Brian Kernighan, Bjarne Stroustrup, Larry Ellison... the more the better.
THEN, we could mine this data set and maybe we could even find that there is some mysterious connection between beeing a famous computer guy AND success of wealth AND which of these have thick trade-pipes with governmental contracts which in turn loopback towards their welth.
This way we would have way more accurate conclusions and much more credible ones. And with a much lower margin of error as the sampling set would be richer, supposing that the sampling set would not be cherry-picked.
Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.
