Is there a second source for this? I can't find anything outside of the linked article. E.g. In Google I can't find anything about OPP child porn busts since Sept 2014; I can't find anything about this on the OPP home page; nor in the last month or so on EFF blog (EFF provided a quote for the article).
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Let's not let facts get in the way of Internet outrage.
Barber is not a good example, since (afaik) barbers are not required to be licensed. Generally licensees are due to public safety concerns: e.g. the push for licensing engineers was due in part to pressure vessels exploding and killing people. Similarly poorly done plumbing can spill sewage into neighboring houses; improper electrical installations can start fires; improper gas fittings can cause natural gas explosions; etc.
We are not born with a unique ID burned into our souls;
We do, however, have a unique ID burned into our bodies. It goes something like GATTACA...
(well, excepting twins, chimeras and a few other special cases).
It's kinetic energy increases, but its mass stays constant (exactly 0), as does its total energy (since it loses gravitational potential energy as it gains kinetic energy).
To expand on the other reply: It's out of place for a technical discussion because it's a very uncommonly used word -- at least I didn't know the meaning before I looked it up. Whereas in a technical discussion you tend to keep vocabulary reasonably straight forward (I think I heard Grade 9 level once) since the goal is to express technical information clearly, not impress your listeners with flowery vocabulary.
Plus rocket reuse has not happened yet.
Except by NASA from 1981-2011.
Even if I am wrong -- even if the majority of alien civilizations turn out to be biological -- it may be that the most intelligent alien civilizations will be ones in which the inhabitants are SAI.
SAI is her term for "superintelligent artificial intelligence". So she has just written a tautology. Unless you want to get into super-superintelligent or ultra-superintelligent.
And the rest is more of the same.
Or maybe intelligence is weakly ordered, and "most intelligent alien civilization" has as much meaning as "biggest civilization". I.e.: most intelligent/biggest according to what measure?
g is also a unit of acceleration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
Airspace is mostly empty, and air traffic flows along well regulated routes, with many electronic aids/sensors (radar, glide slope & localizing beams for landings, etc.)
The challenge of land vehicles are (1) the unpredictable, dense, environment, and (2) the signalling is mostly visual (lines, stop lights, etc.) which is hard for computers to interpret.
I never expected to see a (Score:4, Insightful) post asking for the opinion of Bennett Haselton.
The problem with being able to allow/deny individual permissions is the app developers now have 2^n configurations to test, instead of just one. Which is either going to lead to a much higher testing cost, or apps which are buggier when run with less than full requested permissions.
As the city gets whiter, it reflects more light, which is bad for cities with long, cold, winters.
But why is it bad for Seattle?
The report they are drawing their findings from found no wrongdoing on Google's part:
"We found that Ames officials accurately reported H211’s relationship with the Center to DLA-Energy but DLA-Energy believed H211 was performing only NASA-related missions and therefore was entitled to fuel at the cost-plus-surcharge rate. We found that a misunderstanding between Ames and DLA-Energy personnel rather than intentional misconduct led to H211 receiving the discounted fuel rate for flights that had no NASA-related mission." (emphasis mine).
So more like buying gas from a gas station which had accidentally listed the wholesale price than siphoning gas from a friend.
Now that we've got that elementary lesson out of the way, on to the Somalian anarchy falsehood. Somalia is currently controlled by thugs and warlords. In other words, Somalia is run by coercive authority, not free association. It may be "illegitimate" or "unofficial" coercive authority, but it certainly is coercive authority, and that means it can't be anarchy, which is a political state defined by the absence of coercive authority, not the presence of it.
Which is all well and good, but a common argument against anarchy is that it's an unstable political system, prone to transforming into a dictatorship or monarchy. This is because (so the argument goes), in the absence of a central government, local thugs would run free taking whatever they want, eventually forming mini-dictatorships were the strongest gangs control their "turf," and the general populace is worse off than under a central governement. It's in this context that the example of Somalia is brought up, because this is (as far as I know) exactly what's happening there.