One that I have fallen off of many times.

But just perhaps, our current 'schema' of (yes scare quotoes 1111!) of ... liscencing intellectual ideas is pretty dumb as hell.

Perhaps as a society we should just do away with this monstrosity of a dinosauriod hemorage inducing system. And U know... I don't know socialism this shit... so artists can get payed fairly based on the merit, popularity, or other measurable, qualitative variables of their work... U know we wouldn't even have to have some gulag of a system, we could have multiple ways of doing this. We could even have privitized funds for this!

But not with our current bullshit way of selling and trading empires of bullshit that does not and will not ever, really, technically, 'belong' to anyone in perpetuity.

Just a thought, oh, and happy New Year slashdot.

lol i know right, just in time for some real machevelian authoritarianism, this chocolate business is serious (yes, I agree)

In that case if the country is failing and the vast majority of the families of this country are failing and being ruled by dynasty. Then our goal posts are pretty far off for poverty.

No one should suffer as I have or as I have seen many others. No it's not impossible to be successful and move up in the world and enjoy 1st world privilege. But the way this country is. It's losing ground here. And the vast majority of our wealth is built on corruption from 50 years ago.

Except that they will only be tiny little blobs of quantum stuff.

Probably in you're pockets. Or in a bank that doesn't allow online access. But wow that'd be a tough concept to sell in this day and age. I didn't say we were wrong for having our money online. I said it was just too easy to get at. And people who are inclined to commit this kind of crime are inclined to get at it online where it's easy to get at in our really terrible online banking system.

But that would be less of an issue if less people had incentive to be corrupt. In an inherently 'good' society, people wouldn't really need 'extra protection' for their money. Though this is ideal shenanigans. It doesn't hurt to strive for a society where most people are 'good' and this is a low priority issue.

Come to think of it. I don't think it's a major problem. Unless you're rich and have lots of accounts and are easily targeted, perhaps somewhere in the middle class with a shitty bank, not necessarily rich, but rich to most thieves eyes.

Criminals commit crimes, but they aren't the root cause of crime. I think that is the clarification that will help you understand my perspective.

The only way to protect you're selves from cybercrime is to not put you're assets in easily accessible places by 'cyber criminals'. Believing you can catch all the criminals to end crime is the worst fallacy I've encountered.

* crime is not caused by criminals, it's caused by situations that cause the majority of people to become criminals.
* Cybercrime is on the rise because the payouts are better then other forms of crime.
* People are getting smarter and so are criminals too
* Our internet infrastructure is woefully in-adequate for what we want to use it for. But no one is willing to go back to the older and more reliable way of doing this. Which also had their fair share of dirty issues (filecabnets raided in the middle of the night out of the white house anyone)

Needless to say if you don't want people to be criminals. Don't give them incentives to be criminals and try to reform people or bring them up so they feel like being a part of society rather then antisocial sociopaths.

Of course there's probably no way to eliminate sociopathy 100% from the human genome. But there is good reason for it right now. Eliminate that reason and we'll decrease it 100 fold.

"We didn't focus on it because we weren't sure if it was a true signal or an instrument error,"

Because they were told not too. They damn well knew their instruments were calibrated right or the data would have been tossed.

This is such bullshit and just goes to show you how much control the fossil fuel industries really have over the world. If you don't think there aren't crazy old scrooges with their fingers on assassins harassing scientists, government officials and powerful businessmen and dictators and tryants alike.

You're a fucking moron.

Does everyone get directly assassinated that goes up against these bastards? Nope. But indirectly enough pressure is put on the whole pyramid scheme of society to kill any innovation down low at the base and to keep the top tightly controlled. And trust me the tools of terror these assholes use aren't simply assasins. It's just a blank generalization of the situation.

We'll get there. And I agree. Better to boil the human error down a notch from the entire driving population to a few engineers and scientists who've devoted their careers to making viable driver less cars.

It's not the # of meatbags thats the problem. It's their distribution and quality. Quantity is not really a factor here. Unless you think decreasing Quantity will some how magically increase quality and stop meatbags from distributing themselves poorly again.

Nope

Scientists don't care about doing good or bad more or less than any other human being.

More simplified for you?

I don't believe in the true binary principles of good and bad.

Morality is highly subjective.

To be honest. The only way a scientist earns respect is to be peer reviewed and have their theories tested. Hence the ones that go down in history as discovering something. That is the only measure in which science proves it's merit. In all other areas science is without a conscience.

Is that their culture only allows 1 child, usually male, and that kid is doted on. Of course there is way to much incentive and doting on that one child. Creating the little emperor syndrome (google it) and now we have a government exploiting this. But most likely all this extra donated blood will probably go to waste.

Unless China is ruled by vampires. Which I doubt.

There is nothing about moriality in science. Fools think that the label scientists equates to any other label like saint or angel or citizen.

We are all human. All humans are morally flexible. Scientists are no exception. There are scientists with good morality and scientists without.

But if you really want to look at the percentage of population and say that scientists have any higher a ratio of morality? Naw lol. You've got to be kidding me.

Scientists are just as bad as all the rest of us. And MOST of us won't even stand up for what we really want. What we really believe. And what we really deserve.

We live in a culture of shame, fear, ignorance, and basic root chakra survival need. Most people haven't opened up to more than that primal level of being. (I don't care if you don't believe in chakras it's a linguistic construct to describe the primitive level of awareness that we have in common with worms.)

Peace, shallam, fuck you and all that.

I am genuinely glad more and more space exploration is happening outside of just Nasa and the US.

The more people with different perspectives and regimes we get out there the more likely the information we get back will actually be accurate :)

Who have been consistently modding me down and flaming me.

That this is a fine example of one of those 'myriad' resources for generating power that I was talking about.

This is just 1.... and this is not new. It's just finally been commercialized a bit. Perhaps. Or IBM will sell it and another company will sit on it. Or so until 20 yrs later and more mental programing destroys peoples ability to set up their own power infrastructures outside of what they 'expect' from state, and government and corporate america.

hahahahahaha :(