Fair point - I guess I should have said "the general area where Menlo Park and EPA are, that's there's not a great name for collectively" is mid-gentrification. Maybe we should call the area "Ravenswood", mostly because it sounds cool.
Okay... fine... but that's entirely theoretical.
Right, like all of science.
No one has actually found dark matter... as in put it under a microscope or touched it
Right, like all of cosmology.
There's solid evidence for the existence of dark matter - it's composition remains a mystery as early hypotheses aren't panning out.
What I don't get is why anyone would think Dark Matter would form layers above and below the galactic disk. Hard to see why the distribution about the galaxy would be anything but spherical.
Sure, all you have to do is make numerically accurate predictions of future observations, how hard can that be? Or failing that, just be a String Theorist
Everything is science is "theoretical", that doesn't mean it's unlikely to be true.
Dark matter explains both galaxy rotation and the behavior of the early universe quite well. Until the CMBR data, dark matter was just one hypothesis among many for galaxy rotation, but only dark matter explained the observed pattern of mass distribution when the universe cooled enough to become transparent for the first time. And the numbers matched to a couple of significant digits, not in some hand-wavey way.
What dark matter is made of is still an open question, but it's pretty clear that about 4/5ths of the matter in the universe is dark.
Yeah, but it's about moving the Overton window. As the democratic state becomes weaker, private businesses take over a governing role. Before you had to bribe - now you just pay directly for cops.
That's the real story here. And Menlo Park used to be quite the bad neighborhood, so with Cali government falling apart it would be a disturbing development if this meant that you have to hire your own police officer if you want police protection. But I think that's sensationalized - Menlo Park is already mid-gentrification, already has a very high police presence. It's just not the case here that Facebook needed to pay the cops just to do their job.
There's more here than meets the eye. FB certainly could have hired off-duty police officers as security guards for cheaper. It's either some stunt by FB, or a blatant shakedown by the local PD (nice campus you've got there
Wow, where does the hate come from?
Sure, if you mean "working memory" as a loose analogy for the computer sense, sure, I agree with you because that requires active contemplation. If by "working memory" you mean the stuff we're currently contemplating, its the contemplating part that matters, yes? That's how you're distinguishing "working memory" from "memory"? So the difference is "intelligence", not the storage medium?
You can't "use" an concept stored in "human memory" directly either. Thinking about stuff copies* it out of memory and into consciousness. (Or did you mean "memory" in a very loose sense, in which case I agree with you).
*Human memory is normally quite lossy - we reconstruct most of what we remember - heck, we construct most of what we see - so "copy" isn't the best word, really.
Human memory is just storage, no different from paper. It's the intelligence that's relevant, not the storage.
A firm yes to the second, unless you have some very particular religious beliefs.
The first though is less obvious: the best current working definition for "knowledge" is "justified, true belief". Wikipedia holds many things that are both true and justified, but Wikipedia doesn't "believe" anything, if we're just speaking about the web site, not the editors.
"Belief" certainly requires sentience (feeling), and maybe sapience (thinking). Personally, I think human sapience isn't all that special or unique, that we're only different in degree, not in kind, from the smarter (non-human) animals, and sentience is quite common. How aware does a system have to be to have a belief? More than a web site does today, to be sure, but I think that bar is pretty low.
Do you see any of that as different from what I said above? Or were you thinking that 3 isn't true of "theories" as well?
Not being tech savvy is no excuse. Hire a contractor to do the work, then pay for a security audit from a different firm. That's all that's required.
A "law" is simply a terse theory. There's no hierarchy where a "law" is better than a "theory", its just that some very theories that explain a lot despite having a very short mathematical expression get called "laws".
E.g., there's no "law of evolution" because there's not a clever math one-liner that conveys the theory. "F=ma" is a "law" not because it's particularly true (since it's not), but because it's 4 characters.
There's nothing that makes one more stupid than being too arrogant to learn from one's mistakes. Accept corrections, like compliments, gracefully and move on.
Right - the protocol only fails for anonymity when someone can log the IP addresses associated with every bitcoin transaction ever, and get the physical address associated with every IP address. So, yeah, here on Earth it's not anonymous, but it looks great on a whiteboard.
If you keep logs, you out your users when the government gets the logs - that's hardly news. And bitcoin "keeping logs" is fundamental to the protocol. It's still a neat protocol, and it's probably easier to anonymize (or steal) an IP address than a credit card, but don't think you're hidden from the NSA by the power of bitcoin.
We *shouldn't just creatively