This would create an oligarchy, not a democracy.
These studies clearly demonstrate that the Cl is richly innervated with a wide and diverse array of neurotransmitters and neuromodulators. Lesion, stimulation and recording experiments demonstrate that the functional and physiologic capacity of the Cl is quite robust. A recurring theme of claustral function appears to be its involvement in sensorimotor integration. This may be expected of the Cl, given the degree of heterotopic, heterosensory convergence and its interconnectivity with the key subcortical nuclei and sensory cortical areas. The Cl remains a poorly understood and under investigated nucleus.
It makes sense that a major loss of function is associated with interrupting the Claustrum - but there are several nuclii in the brain - the Hippocampus being one. Claiming it is the 'one true center of consciousness' in the brain doesn't account for the countless studies which reveal just how complex the operation of our neural networks actually are, and may be premature.
If a system is insecure a "good" architecture is irrelevant - you're still screwed.
Please can you explain how BitCoin is vulnerable to Heartbleed?
I think good architecture is essential to good security. That's why I posted.
While atheists and even atheism itself was generally frowned upon I have to say as the first Muslim and non-pink person to attend - I was very glad to have gone there and grown.
Despite what people may think the teaching there is some of the best in the UK and even with the deep and sincere commitment to faith you have an equally deep and sincere commitment to scientific enquiry and truth. We were never taught creationism, and any school or teacher considering it would have been politely but firmly shown the door.
I guess the thinking was us kids would need our wits about us out here to survive.
Why does he deserve it? Just because he's "good"?
A person without a dream is a tragedy unfolding.
Then I realized, he's managed to turn the focus of the world back onto the invasion of our selves, social and personal, by governments.
So I'd ask: "why then, is the response so anaemic?"
Who we are used to be about our bodies, our family, our social interactions day to day. Suddenly as technology began to increase our reach - we found all forms of communication first monitored, then censored by governments, and their corporate proxies.
I don't deny them the right to protect themselves, but it seems to me that 'they' are 'us'. We all want status, and security, so we aim for money (counters printed by them), power (positions, and authority rationed out by them), and I don't know a single business leader or politician who doesn't defend themselves by setting up legal structures to deflect blame or absolve themselves.
What we need perhaps is to take the tools of the internet and create something new - looking at BitCoin and its resilience in the face of massive corporate and government opposition I think what worries them is they'll first cede control of the coinage, and then cede control of the courts.
Coins are important - we used to rely on governments to stand by their currency but with BTC and related currencies we can now create unforgeable, and publicly verifiable money. No need for banks, and their associated parasites.
Courts are also vital - well aware that people are tried in public as much as in private - both the etiquette and the frameworks for legal accountability are shifting towards the individual. I'm heartened by the approach of the EU, and glad that Google is moving forward to implementing privacy carefully and thoughtfully.
Sorry for writing so much, please let me know what you think privacy will be like in 5-10 years - and critically - if you think we'll be able to be private citizens again, or is it already too late?
[...]offers up to $10,000 for information leading to the arrest of anyone who intentionally aims a laser at an aircraft.
That is precisely my point. The fact of aiming a laser can't be enough - so it comes down to intentions. Those of the person accused - and their accuser.