No, it is not "here in the open", because "250 and fewer" includes zero as an option. As per the Ars article someone already posted early on in this /. discussion, http://arstechnica.com/tech-po..., the 0-250 range is a reflection of new guidelines from the department of justice. A canary almost becomes unworkable for companies now because saying you have not received such a warrant in the given time period is equivalent to saying you have received 0 orders, which is more specific than the smallest allowable range of 0-250.

Yes.

Contrast this to the reboot of Battlestar Galactica , which paints a very
realistic portrait of advancement of science/artificial intelligence causing the downfall of humanity..

FTFY

http://www.nature.com/nature/j... Can any astro-types chime in on this?

So like a typical ideologue, when you fail to summon logical arguments to support your view, you turn in your desperation to your last resort: abusive language. I hope you realize that you're just revealing that for you, this is about emotional investment, not rationality.

I know that me personally am willing to help the next generations by making reasonable compromises right now but it seems it's not the general consensus.

You do what you want, but who are you to tell other people how to live their lives? And yet, that's what most environmentalists do. This is why environmentalism really is like a watermelon: green on the outside, red on the inside.

I live in Canada, and considering the number of articles in recent years which have listed the impacts of global warming on the country, it's looking like a huge win. Even if only some of the permafrost melts, this is a huge increase in arable land and will allow as much as a doubling of agricultural output. Access to additional fresh water also increases significantly, which is notable given how much hoopla is made about water as an ever-more scarce resource. Increasing population density further north, and making the north actually productive. Better access to natural resources in the north, including mining and gas/oil extraction in the arctic. Levying fees on ships going eventually year round through the northwest passage. The boon global warming, if real, will bring to this surpasses by an order of magnitude anything its politicians could bring about. So yes, please, bring it on!

It's because you're a crybaby complaining about moderation on Slashdot. Seriously, are you 12?

I doubt there's any harm in that.

There's tremendous economic harm.

If you'd actually read the already existing reply, you'd have noticed I already corrected my phone's autocorrect error before your redundant post.

Good thing I live in Canada. All I would get here from the mounties is a polite chiding.

it's --> its

And yet that distinction couldn't be more significant: only one of those is realizable in our physical universe (and thus it's limits are the also the ultimate limits of any physically realizable objects, be they brains or computational machines).

I would not mind paying for news if I thought it would make a difference and bring back real investigative journalism. But how many people do you think would be willing to do so? Not enough to make a dent in the situation, given how much real difference other scandals such as the NSA spying revelations have failed to make.

I didn't expect my submission to be actually posted, so I didn't bother to write a summary and only sent in a naked link to the story. Thanks to the editor for doing my job. My intention was just to bring attention to this in the expectation that someone else would make a proper submission. And, in a way, it's what happened--this is really timothy's submission.