Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Not acupuncture (Score 1) 159 159

How does the study using newer techniques used by modern acupuncturists debunk the study or the technique with regard to the mechanism by which acupuncture would function if treated with it today?

The GP's point is he is anti-acupuncture and making up criteria that must be met randomly. Which "then" is it he's referring to and which Chinese? There isn't even a single consistent set of points over time, just like we've adjusted treatments in western medicine. And just like we used to bleed patients and doctors in western medicine at one point based a large part of their medicine on what were metaphysically derived ideas of what happened in the body and how it functioned I have no doubt Chinese practitioners have adapted their techniques quite a bit. Especially as they've been able to communicate more effectively and share experiences. After all, they've been doing it much longer and treat a dramatically larger sample size.

Comment Re:Not acupuncture (Score 1) 159 159

"The Chinese did not have electricity nor does anyone claiming to be an acupuncturist use electricity. "

Didn't have, did they go somewhere? It is still in routine use throughout China for the successful treatment of many illnesses. What I still don't understand is why so much time is still spent trying to beat placebo when the placebo effect is very powerful medicine even getting better over time vs drugs that crushed it in controlled trials previously. Provided it has the raw materials the cells in the body can trigger almost every physiological response we accomplish with medications. Why not spend more time focusing on ways to get it to accomplish the placebo effect in some systematic and consistent way without the use of external medications and their side effects?

In any case, acupuncture has continued to advance and there are no shortage of practitioners using https://www.google.com/search?q=electroacupuncture&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Comment Re: They're not going to arrest him! (Score 1, Insightful) 312 312

As someone else pointed out, look at the stats. Cars cause far far more accidents and deaths than guns and they include self-defense and police shootings (which are the bulk). You are more likely to get struck by lightning than shot by a gun.

Are you terrified and suggesting it should be a crime when someone is sitting behind the wheel of a parked car with the engine turned off and you are in the path? Well, you are in far more danger there.

The side effect of the governments successful disarmament of the people is that all our civilian firing mechanisms are essentially technology from the 1800's, and for the most part we found the safest and most reliable variations on them 50-100 years ago. A standard wall outlet, most power tools, climbing in your attic or on your roof are all things that are more dangerous to you than a gun in the hands of anyone who isn't deliberately trying to shoot you.

The gun can't actually go off if it isn't cocked with tension behind the firing pin and a bullet in the chamber. Check that, treat it like it's loaded anyway. Assume it's going to shoot anything in the general direction you point it at anyway. Don't keep your finger on the trigger. The bullet comes out the hole at the end. There shouldn't be anything in that hole. The bullets are the boomy part and dramatically less likely to go off spontaneously than firecrackers but should be treated with the same caution if they failed to go off.

There you go, you and everyone who reads that paragraph now has all the gun training they need to be beyond perfectly safe holding a gun. Pretty much all of it any idiot would guess just looking at one and knowing it's purpose. When you hear people calling a guy waving a gun around a moron they mean moron not ignorant. 99% of those morons are actually people who understood once they checked for a clear chamber the gun was safe. That part is partly just to shame you in to being aware at all times and to prepare you for how much people over-react at the sight of a gun.

To learn that much and the rest you need be perfectly safe SHOOTING a gun takes about 20 minutes and one clip of ammo. A couple clips and someone who knows how to shoot and you'll actually be a decent shot.

Comment Re: They're not going to arrest him! (Score 1) 312 312

For starters the roadway and the air are two different jurisdictions.

Also, I don't know about in Connecticut but here it's legal to mount on a vehicle unless the police believe you are causing a panic. If loaded the gun could potentially accidentally fire depending on the mechanism a tank never would. Outlawing a tank on the road is just silly if it's otherwise road legal.

Comment Re: They're not going to arrest him! (Score 4, Insightful) 312 312

Threatening to hurt someone is illegal, threatening to hurt them with any kind of weapon is a bigger charge regardless of the weapon.

Simply having a weapon in someone's presence isn't illegal even if they feel threatened. It isn't your fault is someone is overly sensitized to guns or simply timid.

In the case of a threat it makes sense for the charge to escalate because the level of threat is escalated by a weapon. For everything else where there is a more substantial charge because a gun was involved it's ridiculous. If I actually hurt you it's how bad I hurt you that counts which automatically accounts for a gun. If I robbed you what difference does it make what I use? You suffered the same injury.

Comment Re:Well, DUH! What did YOU think your customers do (Score 1) 48 48

When you sell weapons to civilians you expect nothing of the sort. Civilians using weapons to do something normal people would consider evil is exceeding rare. In the US for instance there are millions of guns in civilian hands but civilians kill people with guns very very rarely. Gun death statistics for a year are well below automobile death statistics in a day and almost in almost all cases the shooter is an agent of government (usually police domestically).

Comment Re:Vendor's responsibiity over buyer's actions (Score 1) 48 48

Consider this, there would be no democracy in the world if the powers at be did not have to fear the mob which is why we have a 2nd amendment. Now that every nation in the world including ours has disarmed the people to the point the powers-at-be no longer have to fear the mob... what happens to democracy and do you honestly think it hasn't happened already?

Comment Re:How convincing! (Score 1) 48 48

There are different flavors of troubling. Many of the hacking groups out there are effectively digital rebel warriors trying to fight oppressive regimes like Egypt and the US. Their actions may be criminal and in some cases immoral but they are fighting greater evils perpetrated by the powers we've failed to resist by conventional means. That is civil disobedience. Perhaps they considered that getting tools to these elements was worth the risk of simple profiteers getting some exploits but did not consider that the regimes themselves might be getting the exploits.

Comment Re:NSA (Score 1) 48 48

Yes but rebel exploit sellers want rebels to buy exploits to use against oppressive regimes like... essentially everyone who used Hacking Team. Pretty much everyone on their client list qualifies as an oppressive regime. Including the government in control of the servers I'm posting on.

Comment Re:I thought they *used* to launch their own (Score 1) 154 154

"tens of times what, say, the President of the US earns"

That's probably still true but lets not pretend that government salary represents any notable portion of what the president, presidential appointees, or congress critters make. Not even when you only consider the bribes in the form of high salaries and benefits without actual duties that are paid on leaving office and offered while in office for favors.

"If a computer can't directly address all the RAM you can use, it's just a toy." -- anonymous comp.sys.amiga posting, non-sequitir

Working...