Slashdot Mirror

Actually, it is almost identical, in a "Vivendi Universal is totally going to sue" sort of way, to the old Sierra On-Line network / Imagination Network.

Imagination network screenshot
MyTopia Screenshot

Hopefully that GUI is not the final version.

It'd be nice if they'd copy MS Office 2004 for OS X or Lotus Symphony rather than continue on with a bad copy of MS Office 2003. Notice the side bar? Floating on OS X (I prefer floating, btw), part of the window in Lotus Symphony. For me, at least, that is significantly more helpful than toolbars/menus or that irritating "ribbon".

It's also be awesome if Writer supported tabs and split editor like Eclipse. Those two features are one of the main reason I do everything I possibly can in Eclipse.

Hopefully that GUI is not the final version.

It'd be nice if they'd copy MS Office 2004 for OS X or Lotus Symphony rather than continue on with a bad copy of MS Office 2003. Notice the side bar? Floating on OS X (I prefer floating, btw), part of the window in Lotus Symphony. For me, at least, that is significantly more helpful than toolbars/menus or that irritating "ribbon".

It's also be awesome if Writer supported tabs and split editor like Eclipse. Those two features are one of the main reason I do everything I possibly can in Eclipse.

Here, on behalf of all mexicans, let me lend you $100.00MXN

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/83/100MXN.jpg

You are very mistaken, this is an extremely complicated question, moreso than TFA states. In 1798, Thomas Malthus started worrying about population growth saying because we were growing at an exponential pace. This thought continued and Hardin used at as one of his main points in his famous paper the Tragedy of the Commons. But, as this became a more important question, we have gathered more data and it turns out our assumption that population growth would stay exponential was wrong.

Here midway on the page are some graphs of current population estimates and global growth rates. You can see that global birth rates have already declined. And even the high end estimates for global population start to taper off. Some even predict global population will decline.

The reasons for this decline are also complicated, but the two most prevalent explanations are first, the advent of birth control finally allows women to control when they have children. And second, and more importantly, look at this picture a growth rate of 0 means the population of that country is staying at a constant level (for every birth there is a death), negative means population decline, >0 means population growth. Notice that most of what we call "industrialized" nations are at a maintenance level or are in population decrease. That includes China and India, the two most populated countries in the world. While most the population growth is just in Africa and parts of the Middle East and South America(and note the south africa and egypt don't have growth). The reason for all this is explained as, as a society gets more 'industrialized' the need for families to be larger decreases. While in places where farming is necessary for survival, the incentive to have more children (free labor) is high. Its not that Africans don't have access to birth control, its that its more beneficial for them to not use it.

So the prevailing theory today is that as Africa gets more industrialized, their population growth will go down and global population will stabilize. We could argue about whether or not Africa will get industrialized, but I think in absence of very strong evidence, we have to believe the more industrialized a nation gets, its population growth approaches 0 or even negative.

Thank you, Sir Rodney, for that very important piece of information.

His district is made up of large portions of the suburbs of Chicago, and also the area directly around a large government funded laboratory, Fermilab.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/62/IL14_109.gif
How the HELL that equates to the more rural areas of Illinois is amazingly unclear.
Oh, just because he's also got the swath that covers only a few people in a rural area?

not likely.

He was voted in by fermilab employees and liberal democrats in the chicago suburbs.

it's more amazing that Hastert was ever elected in this area than this guy being elected.....

"West Bank and Gaza Strip, which themselves were part of Jordan and Egypt, respectively, " o rly? so maps: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b8/Palestine_south_1924.jpg are lying. -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine Dude, you realize you're pretty much quoting the previous articles' "zionist arguments" which have been refuted. It's a bit funny, but it also borderlines on sad.

Hats off to the JPL nerds who made this work. I am floored.

About peer-to-peer: No.

And if my memory serves me correctly, the biggest component of Wikimedia's expenses are bandwidth and server purchases, both to replace dying boxes and to catch up with the ~ 35 Gbit/s demand seen these days. (Well, it was 35 Gbit/s the last time I saw that number. It wouldn't surprise me if it were all the way up in the neighborhood of 40 Gbit/s during peak hours.)

Surely the founder of Wikipedia has better things to do than add a spam link to his own blog in an attempt to boost its page rank? He's had his share of controversy, but there are better ways he could accomplish such a thing (like, for example, spamming via Wikipedia -- while "nofollow" is enabled on Wikipedia, Wales was the one who had it enabled in the first place).

The fund drive for Wikipedia is thrice of last year. No wonder they only reached third of it.

I am unable to find a link for 2007 right now, but look here:
For 2004-2006
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/28/Wikimedia_2006_fs.pdf
For 2006-2007
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/49/Wikimedia_2007_fs.pdf

The fund drive for Wikipedia is thrice of last year. No wonder they only reached third of it.

I am unable to find a link for 2007 right now, but look here:
For 2004-2006
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/2/28/Wikimedia_2006_fs.pdf
For 2006-2007
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/49/Wikimedia_2007_fs.pdf

If you want to have a minimalistic but lengthy and well-written index of fundamental concepts, you need a traditional encyclopedia, not Wikipedia. If you want a searchable database of all human knowledge, you need a search engine, not Wikipedia.

Personally, I think of myself not as a deletionist or an inclusionist but as a AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDMTDist. For example, I like the articles that outline specific, well known mathematical proofs (like the proof that e is irrational, but I think many of the articles like "List of Magical Aliens in [insert random series here]" need to be merged (but not necessarily deleted).

More of a social concern about having too many articles; monitoring articles takes time, and having articles on topics that they consider worthless, but that still need to be monitored, causes the amount of eyes watching each article to decrease. This allows, in theory, more vandalism to sneak by, and decreases the average quality of Wikipedia articles, or so I've heard

You may want to read the Deletionism page on Metawiki for more info.

Even when the skies are clear, it's getting pretty hard to find skies that are Dark; it doesn't take much light pollution to wipe out a 3 day exposure to see some really faint object. You have to find a location that typically has clear skies, is high enough to get you above most of the atmospheric turbulence, has dark skies and isn't likely to have a housing subdivision built next door two years after you put a multi-billion dollars instrument into service.

You're looking at the wrong graph.

Energy usage != Electricity usage

Try this one, small though it is.

we've got the wikipedia on disc here at 421MB or the direct download from wikimedia here, though i'm not sure how big those are.

The meal wasn't even paid for!
From TFA: "She pointed out that the foundation rejected the steakhouse expense.";

It appears Wool has made unsupported accusations before:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Candidates/Danny/questions#Whistleblower_policy

A lot of people just suggest replacing one mechanical device for another supposedly more ergonomic version (trackball vs mouse, etc), but for me, it just ends up causing pain in another region of my wrists. I realize asking for a brain-machine interface that types my thoughts is far-fetched, but I don't think a simple device that controls the one-dimensional coordinates of my mouse is asking too much. Not when monkeys were moving mechanical arms with their minds nearly 10 years ago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_machine_interface/

Oh, and does this image remind anyone else of their cubicle?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8c/BCI.jpg/

Florence sues Wikipedia? Kind of ironic, isn't it?

There's a 3D shader technique called Phong shading. If Phong shading was patented then Blinn-Phong would never have be discovered which is a change in math. Blinn-Phong is faster and provides more accurate results.

All software is a form of math, one technique can have completely different looking math but produces the same results such as the prior example. You can not patent math because you didn't invent anything, you just discovered the formula which was already there.

There's a 3D shader technique called Phong shading. If Phong shading was patented then Blinn-Phong would never have be discovered which is a change in math. Blinn-Phong is faster and provides more accurate results.

All software is a form of math, one technique can have completely different looking math but produces the same results such as the prior example. You can not patent math because you didn't invent anything, you just discovered the formula which was already there.

Here's a direct link to the imaages.

The Man in the moon will be sad.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/04/Le_Voyage_dans_la_lune.jpg

The evidence for gravitational lensing is much stronger than that. In the most extreme images, we can actually see multiple images of a single source. In this image, there are four copies of the distant quasar because of the lensing of the closer galaxy (center of image). Even though gravitational lensing is a fairly small effect, given the massive distances we're talking about, the deviations are readily measurable.

Also, many of the measurements come from Hubble images, for which there is no atmospheric turbulence to deal with (atmospheric effects also average-out over a fairly short period of time, and though they decrease resolution they are easy to differentiate from astronomical sources of distortion).

The error bars are small enough that we know the light from distant sources is being deflected. The simplest explanation is that there is a cluster of mass between us and the source, whose gravity is deflecting the light.

we had a self-propelled launcher and it had an 60KW generator built in, which ran off the GMC 6 cylinder supercharged diesel engine. When the electronic governor fail, it fail in the full on mode. Physically what happened when the governor failed was as soon as you switched on the generator, the engine would go instantly from idle to full power and the weakest link, the jack-shaft going from the engine crankshaft to the supercharger would shatter. A nuclear or even a fire generation plant would have the same thing happen, when the alternator stop supplying resistance to the turbine would overspeed until a bearing went or the turbine started throwing blades.

And what about Wikispecies?

True. I mean, didn't even get the following right:

"Quick, name one executive's bio photo that shows him or her wearing a billowy floral shirt? Zzzt! Times up! Wear these on vacation if you must, but don't show up to a quarterly meeting in one of these numbers."

Pfft. Evidently the author has never been to an APEC conference.

Yes,

Good eyes:

Photoshopped chains alright:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f9/Jassi_im_String-Tanga.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

Does look like it. See also pictures of same model in these locations:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jassi_in_Hand-_und_Fu%C3%9Fschellen.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Rubberclothing_(Latex)_-_models_Jassi_and_Dana.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ringknebel_Jassi_(ringgag_bondage)-cropped.JPG
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Leather-straitjacket_-_model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Knebel)_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Fetters_-_leg_irons_-_photomodel_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Strappado_-_Model_Jassi.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Bondage_(Hogtie)_Model_Jassi.jpg

Ugh. Is it me, or does that woman have a face like Odo?

definitly.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:String_Bikini_(Jassi)_Front.jpg

Same Model, different Bikini,chain around her neck :-)

And here's an image of her that's a bit more telling....

Probably was photoshopped off.
Here is another one with a collar around her neck.

And here is another one but nothing really telling there.

But what is wrong with this picture (from one of the Wikipedia links above)? Is she some sort or slave woman whose chains were photoshopped from her legs but not all of her shadow? WTF?

For those that havn't seen pictures, Ulysses is one of the most beautiful spacecraft ever built. Some future archeologist will love getting this for their museum: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Ulysses_spacecraft.jpg

Well it certainly is shiney, but I'm not sure I can go along with it being "one of the most beautiful spacecraft ever built". It reminds me of the Larson cartoon of the baby warthog asking it's mother: "Mama, am I pretty?"

For those that havn't seen pictures, Ulysses is one of the most beautiful spacecraft ever built. Some future archeologist will love getting this for their museum: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Ulysses_spacecraft.jpg

Agreed, but in this case it IS a fact. Go look up the definition of theft. It is not the same as IP infringement.

Again, im not debating if IP infringement is right or wrong as that is a totally different discussion, the only point im making here is that its NOT theft. The continued labeling of it as theft is dishonest marketing.

I'm sure that can be changed. If it is repeated. Over and over and over and over. Hell, you've already adopted thinking in terms intellectual property, now all we need is for you to drop the intellectual prefix.