It's fucking Kevin Spacey. You shut your whore mouth!

First off, does that even mean anything? What units is the "scale" of a universe expressed in?

Scale doesn't have units - if I have a 200x zoom it could be meters or feet or idiotic statements. If only there were an article to answer your fucking questions:

the largest observable scales are âoeonlyâ 92 billion light years or so (from one edge of the observable Universe to the other), while the smallest theoretical scale, the Planck scale, is down at around 10^-35 meters. All told, this is just 62 orders of magnitude

So, did you expect it to be on a scale of a googol squared? Because that's the scale here according to the fucking article.

Weâ(TM)ve managed to zoom in by more than a factor of 10^200, or more than a googol squared, and we still find this same self-similarity, and the same remarkable, intricate structures.

But isn't it mathematically proven that the Mandelbrot set has the same "complexity" at all scales?

Are you telling or asking? Because these videos are pretty damned amazing, and the human brain is a lot better at pattern recognition than computers, and at a zoom of 10^200 the patterns are still self similar. The *theory* of self-similarity either was proven or not proven. I like to see it for myself if possible, and I saw it for myself. I'm not sure I'd understand the proof, but I understand the video.

Was it proven or not?

I'd have thought it would be more interesting to talk about...

Then why didn't you?

That was a supplemental fact from 2002 in a story about stuff encompassing decades. You are missing a lot of information. Did you stop reading at that point?

This is not a mistake.

This is presuming that the arresting officers or investigators must have done their job right, so we should support their side of the story.

The same, effectively, as telling a jury that the defendant must be guilty because why would an innocent man be arrested and in court?
It's not justice, but so far beyond just covering up mistakes.

If what you say were remotely possible, many of these problems would not exist.

'Fixing this is simple" almost always translates to "Here's my oversimplified misunderstanding"

Monsanto products are apparently Round-Up resistant, so you can spray herbicides on otherwise edible plants.

The objections are not against breeding pesticide generation. The objections are against being

1) Unnaturally bred, and therefore largely untested in nature, even if by science
2) Okay with large amounts of herbicides, which will end up in the herb

I assume you drink round-up regularly and have no objection to it in your vegetables, if you object to the objections.

And your objection to resistant weeds is really scare-monger territory. There are much better reasons to object, like exactly what I just typed.

Dr. Oz has repeatedly shown disdain for science and for evidence-based medicine, as well as baseless and relentless opposition to the genetic engineering of food crops

WTF, moron, "relentless" is not "one". And of course he's going to eat the low hanging fruit. That's what his audience likes, appreciates, and wants. That's why people oppose him, because he has an audience that wants the low hanging fruit.

I'm over 40, my fruit hangs low. His audience is likely to like my fruit nonetheless. I'm not judging.

But he can sway a whole lot of people, while peer reviewed journals don't have that sort of audience. Care to rebut?

Show me some proof that anyone cares enough to drive GNU/Hurd to a 1.0 release.

If it gets there, you have your proof. If it doesn't, you were right. Let's wait.

Or without waiting - hey, there's a release just now. Someone is obviously working on it. There's your proof!

But it's not at 1.0 yet. Why is 1.0 a magic number? The original question was who is working on it and why do they care. Now you are quantifying how much they have to care. And if you don't get your proof, do they have to stop working on it? And you're at +3 right now, so someone wasted a mod point on your drivel.

You're not helping.

Offsite, or fireproof stuff. Your choice.

Only through inaction on the part of the citizenry. The fact that they have to ask for this shows we are achieving technical parity. It is up to the citizens to protect the citizens, and we can do exactly that.

Ignoring the question of whether they should be reading the mail (that's another topic, don't dilute this thread), we have effectively been sending post cards instead of envelopes.

We would not have switched to encryption everywhere without this, so it's a problem of their own making. And now it's a question of whether big business is run by citizens. Some are, and have switched, so the "all corporations are bad" nonsense is invalid.

It is up to the citizens to restore the balance of power. Should we trust that the spy agencies will do nothing unconstitutional? I know your answer, but what about the courts that write laws that get overturned?

My point by bringing that up is that the citizens have a responsibility to ensure the government is respecting their rights. If dragnet data collection is allowed by the courts, and the citizens disagree, then encrypt everything.

Most of each species means they can bounce back. Most of all species means they are gone and cannot come back. Huge difference, and it takes a long time to recover from the second one.

How often? All the time. Only I constantly wish for improvement, so that "mediocre" can eventually be left out.

How often you look at something and think the same is apparently "same as a person with no concept of the future, with no imagination, and who is dead inside and is best left alone with a unloaded handgun, some bullets, and a bottle of sloe gin."

Luddite.

It presents the best side of the worst.

I have been yelling at the TV since law and order. Each few years brings us a more invasive demonstration of how the police state can infiltrate the bad guys and make life better for the rest of us.

Cyber is, on the whole, more damaging than anything prior.

Person of Interest balances that slightly, but both the good and bad guys are fighting crime. It is actual crime, but that is only true/confirmed in retrospect unless we know from the start, which is not constitutional.

Or you could be a realist and understand that the people who least understand our society are the ones in charge of it.

The whole of government will be reactive and make incredibly stupid decisions until people capable of understanding contemporary history are in charge.

For the record, and quite a few of us will probably agree, I would support research into the ability to stop time.

Even if researched at the super secret level, enough practical stuff would leak out to be really interesting.

First one to push the button turns the universe into a museum piece for hyper-dimensional creatures, but until then physics would have a field day.