That's one way to look at it. Another is that we'll strive to develop the techniques and technology that can be used to correct this problem through medical intervention. That ability would go a long way towards being able to cure several other hereditary diseases as well. Perhaps being able to meddle with our own genetics will end even more poorly, but we'll likely learn something along the way.

Dogs have had many more generations of breeding to tailor their responses to us than we have had to them - something like 10x as many generations, since they breed about 10x quicker than humans. So they can read us much better than we can read them - they've self-selected for that ability, since the ones that can read us best know best how to suck up to us and get us to feed and shelter them and pick up their poop. Todays dogs are specialists - and their specialty is humans.

Given this, dogs are probably better judges of people than we are.

You're right: if you change what it says by deleting some of the words, then it says something different.

In the next sentence, it says in particular what you're not allowed to use or run, including proxy services.

Use or run: It's not merely that you're not allowed to run proxy services: you're not allowed to use them, either.

If that's stupid-- well, how about that.

As I said: the interpretation of this text could be ambiguous. You could do the lawyer thing and claim to interpret it the way you say. But the clear straightforward text is: proxies are listed on the list of things you are specifically not allowed to use or run.

Part of the problem is that some schizos ARE dangerous - we just don't know ahead of time who they are. If this lets us tell the two apart, awesome. Of course, there's the problem of false positives, as well as the question of environment (does a tendency to be dangerous still need an environmental trigger to manifest itself)?

Unfortunately, all meds have side effects. It's up to the patient, in consultation with their doctors and therapists, to find the right balance, which can change over time. "I feel fine now, I guess I don't need this anymore" is almost always a lie, but a tempting one.

Helps explain why my dog reacts differently to different people with the diagnosis of schizophrenia. Some he's very friendly with, others he makes it abundantly clear that he wants nothing to do with them - or with them being around me.

Dogs can sense a lot of things we miss - maybe they can pick up something about the dangerous ones that we can't. And yes, one of the ones he kept growling at eventually went looking for a gun. Told my neighbor (who has 3 registered hand guns) that he hated my guts and where could he buy a gun? Stopped a few weeks later after dusk walking around with a holster with what appeared, in the dark, to be a gun. Knees on the ground, hands in the air, the whole bit. Apparently he wasn't happy that I had reported him to Youth Protection for moving back to the neighborhood after he had assured the court he wouldn't be having any more contact with a kid living in the next building.

Hi ho, hi ho, time to play whack-the-troll ...

Seriously, neither of those accounts has been active for more than 2 years - since I went pretty much blind. And I've never been one to mod myself up. No need to. Just like calling you a net-kook isn't libelous when at the time you were crap-flooding my posts because I had insulted your whole "hosts file is teh absolutely bestest thing evah", or did you forget that you're the one who started it all. I attacked the message. You, on the other hand, attacked the messenger. But "organized conspiracy?" Your paranoia is showing.

Now, since I've never written ANYWHERE that you are a pedophile, I have to wonder about your continued insistence on bringing that up. You see me behind every post that attacks your hosts file, your trolling, and you. I wonder how many people you accused of being me while I couldn't see to use a computer the last couple of years.

Now, with your continued derogatory comments wrt transsexuals, I have to revise my opinion. You're not stuck in the '90s, but the '80s - or maybe even the '70s. Attack me all you want for being a transsexual - but remember, IT attracts a disproportionate number of the LGBT, as well as people sympathetic to LGBT. Slashdot isn't Little Green Footballs (or whatever it was called).

So, why am I bothering to respond and "feed the troll?" Well, let's look at this from a "utility" point of view. APK has outed himself as a transphobe. His posts make it obvious he thinks that I should be ashamed to be what I am. I'm not, and others in my situation shouldn't be either. So there is some "utility", some good, that can come out of making it clear his behavior just reflects badly on him, whereas ignoring it completely would tend to make it look like such behavior actually has a chilling effect on the intended target.

Obsessed with me he is. I don't even have to post to get a response from him. As shown earlier, he assumes anyone posting anonymous negative comments against him is me. It's happened before. It will happen again. See my .sig. :-)

Ask the Europeans that constantly tell us Americans we are too enslaved to the notion that we all need our own car.

You just made that up. I don't know if you've ever driven around a European city, but car ownership is pretty widespread, at least judging by driving through Rome/London/Paris/etc.

It's funny what some Americans think about Europe. They've got this AM talk radio version of Europe knocking around in their heads. "Yeah, they're all dying in the streets because of socialized medicine and everybody's gay and you can't get a decent hamburger anywhere. And they're a bunch of carpoolers who don't realize that we fought and died so that people could drive their own 4500lb vehicle like God intended." "You betcha, Mack. Next up is Fred from Midland. So, what grinds your gears about Europeans, Fred?"

I guess that would be an answer if nobody ever took the time to show you how to defend yourself with your hands.

I think you have been listening to people, that have gleefully lied to you.

I think you are projecting.

A far cry from "proven to make up data and conceals data that doesn't fit his ideology".

No. Not being able to produce the data that your most important work is based on is not a far cry from making up data and concealing data that doesn't fit his ideology.

If a researcher can't produce his data, his work is not taken seriously. The scientific method includes making your data available so other people can review your work.

Actually, the incorrect part was you writing "Incorrect. Many android apps have arm binaries." There's a difference between using native methods, and being an arm binary. Something that's an arm binary doesn't need dalvik to run (example - the linux os that dalvik runs atop of). Apps, even those using native methods, cannot run stand-alone on the arm cpu..

The very first part of the very first sentence you linked to:

There is simply, by definition, no such thing as an "arm binary android app." All apps require dalvik to start. They can't run on the bare metal or directly atop the host os.

Absolutely. Every single problem I ever had with Windows was my fault. I supported Windows for years, and not once mind you not once ever was any of the problems that I mentioned with Windows ever anyone's fault but mine. A computer could be sitting in another building, an update bitches it up, and somehow, some way, it was my fault.

I know the drill shillboi. Windows can never fail - only we can fail Windows.

Which is why I switched to Unix like systems, where I'm nowhere near as stupid.

They sort of look and feel like apple stores.

I do not want to buy my expensive Tesla from a smelly "genius" walking around with a corporate-logo polo shirt snug around the belly that hangs over his belt, which sports an iPhone holster. I'd rather just order the damn thing on-line and have USPS deliver it to my front door.

Keep it simple: both sides present a computational climate model of Earth, and the model that best fits past and current conditions and observations is the current "winner". (Some credit should be given for parsimony because often one can "fudge" a model by adding complexity.)

I think part of that is also from a "morality hurdle" mentality. Many religious people don't want the alcohol market to be efficient in order to squelch consumption. It may not merely be old-fashioned protectionism of mom-and-pop stores.