...with the names of your critically placed Agents? How hard would it be for an intelligence organization to infilterate Wikiileaks or Amnesty? How are they erasing the names? Where and how are the original documents kept?
I like the idea of WikiiLeaks but they need to clarify their policy for releasing potentially dangerous information.
that ate his children.
I think if I keep re-printing this 100 page word document every time I change a letter I'll eventually run out of paper...
David Cope's system can produce music on the level of a grad student of composition imitating great composers. It has to go through a learning process with lot's of music from the original composer in order to imitate his style. "Original" music hardly. It hasn't produced anything anyone (but a muzack fan) would want to listen to. The controversy surrounding it isn't Ludditism, it's a methodology dispute. How much does he hand-edit his examples after generation? He has not produced a stand-alone version for others to reproduce his results. This is not science, but the religious devotees of scientism propound another triumph of machine over man!
The difference between the claims of the author and the quotes by the scientists is quite remarkable. The scientists claimed they succeeded in creating a "self-replicating" molecule that could optimize it's response to different environments by passing 30 bits of information to the next generation. They specifically denied that they'd created "evolution" in the sense of evolving molecules of higher and higher complexity and more ingenious responses. This didn't stop the author of the story from making these claims however. And of course skeptics will be accused of being "creationists". Good experiment + bad press = scientism not science
...and information had never heard of it.
...only Mickey Mouse has better enforcement.
"When the going gets tough, the tough get empirical." -- Jon Carroll