What a strange world, where on the one hand, people are increasingly paranoid about 'government' or 'corporations' snooping at our private lives, and on the other, the self-same people are mad about iPad, iPhone, Google Glass, etc - all of which are constantly giving away their privacy. And of course, when you point this out in a public forum, you get hit by the mod-censorship. So much for people's love of freedom and the right to speek. Ironic, really.
Just imagine the potential of this - "It is no use logging in - you are going to meet a tall, dark stranger
No, I had to look it up too. Apparently it is about teenage rebellion and was published in 1951, at a time just before being a teenager was seen as something different that deserved a name for itself; as far as I remember, the term "teenager" is relatively new, and the idea that teenagers would reject the ideas of their parents was surprising, to say the least. On that background, perhaps it isn't surprising that it was a powerful book at the time, but I feel the subject is somewhat dated now. The "youth revolution" in the 60es was about the widespread feeling that the parent generation had let their children down, on one hand being far too controlling and restrictive, while on the other hand not caring about them and guiding them in a world where everything seemed to be teetering on the brink. And the 50es was where it started, with Rock'n'Roll and teeange culture.
I love this socialist half-paradise, where Wall Street profits are privatized, gigantic losses from gambling with people's deposits are publicly insured, and intellectual works are treated like a turkey thrown into a pit filled with hyenas.
I love your graphic description, but you should get your concepts straight. Wall Street wouldn't have existed in a Socialist state, and they would have been more likely to socialise than privatise.
...target one person, such as a specific foreign citizen on an H-1B visa
Perhaps in the US; however we don't have that particular concept in Europe, but still see the same problem. Recently, there has been a large number of web-business startups advertising for skillsets that simply don't exist - or are not likely to be found anywhere - such as "5 years' experience with AWS, puppet, Jenkins and vSphere".
I mean, these tools may have been around for longer than 5 years, but cloud computing has only really taken off here in the last couple of years, I think; how would anybody have built up that much experience with them? And you can see these jobs being advertised over and over by different agencies, so they simply can't find the people they thnik they need. The likeliest explanation is that these companies don't understand that hiring engineers is a long-term investment, and that no matter how clever a new guy is, he/she will need specific training and it will take time. Even a factory worker at an old-fashioned assembly line needs to be trained, and software engineering is more complex than that.
Recycling is only a poor excuse for not addressing the problem, which is that we produce things that are meant to be thrown out immediately, such as plastic bags. It isn't impossible to live without those things - there are in fact shops around, where you can buy at least some things unwrapped. It is only a matter of making the effort and being a tiny bit creative.
Well, two words, in a dirty combination.
It is of course illegal to not hire somebody simply because of their age, but that is what goes on all the time. Many if us have been in that situation, one way or another. Personally, I got "made redundant" - which means that tecnically, that position should no longer be required, but funny enough, they hired a younger guy in his late twenties to do my job. Only, it was in 'another' department. I'd been there for over 10 years, won awards and generally had briiliant feed-back from my colleagues, and was loyal and hard-working.
It has taken me 7 months to secure a new job. I have been to how many interviews? 20, maybe 30; it generally goes like this: they seem my CV and love it. I have a telehone interview and they love me for my skills and experience. I come to a face to face, and have a very good conversation. And then I get a rejection because of some minor triviality, like 'not enough in-depth knowledge of what-ever' - something that is clearly not the real reason: namely, that I am 'old', ie. over 50.
And that is such a ridiculous reason on all levels. Even when I was a child, 50 was not 'old', and you were expected to work until you were about 65 - even in manual labour. I have ages of experience with UNIX, Linux, C, C++, Oracle, DB2,
Owning land requires money which requires some job other than hunting and foraging
Up to a point, old chap. The privileged few that own the vast majority of land have rarely had their hands out of their pockets, except to hold a cocktail.
Also there is absolutely no way that this planet can support 7 billion people (or even 1 billion) via hunting and foraging
Depends on what you forage for. If you'll settle for insects and grass, then who knows?
It is very easy to stir these young men up into an anti-Japanese frenzy
It is indeed easy to stir just about ANY young man up; as you ought to remember, if you ever were one.
Apart from that, China has particular reason to feel resentful about Japan, who occupied China in a particularly atrocious way during WWII. And who, unlike Germany, have never lifted a finger to prosecute their war criminals, AFAIK; in fact, they seem to worship them like heroes.
Would it be wise to fight Japan? Certainly not, but I don't think the US are going to involved if they scrap over a desolate island or two, as the US are already engaged elsewhere.
The impact on global climate would be NOTHING MEASURABLE whatsoever
Ah, the good old "It ain't perfect, so I won't have it" fallacy. I can't imagine anybody thinking that this in itself has a significant impact, but that isn't the purpose - it is about starting on the journey. It may be a ten thousand mile journey, but if you don't take the first step, you will never start moving. And unless your body is of a somewhat unusual configuration, you will not be able to do it in one, easy stride. So, get off your backside and start moving forward.
I have seen some of the answers given by other people, and many seem to miss the point of floating point calculations. Floating point is by its very nature imprecise, and when you choose to use it, you have to keep that in mind - the task you want to perform must be one where a certain degree of imprecision does not matter. What you are after is not exact reproducibility, but simply that your results stay within accepted error margins, and depending on the nature of your calculations, these may be very wide - I believe you can still find astronimical measurements where ther error margin is something like +/- 200%.
However, it is a misconception to equate "maths" with "doing numbers", as only a fairly minor part of mathematics have to with numbers; and there are, in fact, computer tools out there for non-numerical calculations, like GAP (http://www.gap-system.org/). And although I haven't seen Mathematica for many years, I believe one of its main features is the ability to solve equations symbolically - ie without numerical caulculations - the result of which is going to be either correct and therefore precise, or incorrect.
I think you are blowing this out of proportion.
But first of all, it is in fact the job of the police to act on suspicion, and suspicion is a subjective term. If a police officer feels you look or move in a way that arouse suspicion, then they have a valid reason - a duty, even - to look into it.
As for the suspicion part - an amazingly high proportion of drivers, and perhaps professional drivers in particular, are found to drive under the influence of something; that is enough to make it worht making these random checks. This is no different from stopping drivers to check their tyres or other things. Blowing in a breathalyzer is not an unreasonably onerous task, so you might say refusing to do so does look a bit suspicious.
The only thing I find out of line is taking DNA samples - it is still not a legal requirement, and I think it is doubtful that the police are authorise to store DNA data about people who have not been covicted of a crime.
I think we should stop screaming "Liberty" every time somebody says or does something we don't agree with. Freedom is too important to be treated with the disrespect the goes into prostituting it for every minor gripe. And the question of whether it i technically legal to print a plastic gun or not, is not about your right to speak your mind freely or live your life without undue interference.
Apart from that, it is beside the point. The purpose of banning things is not to "stop criminals doing whatever" - it is to make it prosecutable. The law - probably your constitution - says that you can not prosecute a person for something that is not explicitly defined as a crime in a law; this is an important, legal principle, that PROTECTS YOUR FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOM - got it? So, if they don't ban the production of firearms by hobbyists, it gets quite difficult to punish the guy who makes them and sells them to whoever is stupid enough to use them. And when they ban them, it is probably not because the authorities are afraid you might go on a rampage with a plastic gun, but because they tend to explode in your hands, especially if they are printed with poor quality plastics; and the authorities do have a duty of care, whether you like it or not.
10TB is some 5000 times more than Dropbox, and 666 times more than what you get with Google (Yes, I know, that number keeps cropping up, doesn't it?)
What will no doubt worry people is that it is a Chinese company, although they are planning to store the data outside of China. I guess, with the NSA scandal unfolding, it is just a question of choosing your poison."
If I may go off on a tangent here; companies beign bought for billions, even though they don't make a profit - isn't that what has been behind all bubbles in the market? I wonder if it wouldn't be better to simply round up all venture capitalists, confiscate their ill-gooten money and shoot them. They are more than a bit like a disease; they infect the market, suck out the value and then let the host die, and like all parasites, they don't understand or care that it is going to kill most of them in the end.
Only joking, of course