Not so. A black hole only eats things that fall into it. A miniature black hole (the size of a molecule), has a lot of mass, but could actually fall in to the core of a planet and stay there.
I suppose Mars would have a lot more wobble, though.
My cell phone has a Camera button on the outside edge. Every now and then, I hear the fake shutter sound that lets me know my cell phone just took a picture of the inside of my pocket.
I'm surprised no one else has mention the worst feature ever: DRM.
A moderately crazy person may enter a school today in order to shoot the place up, but you'd have to be totally crazy to attempt such when you know that one out of ten students will be shooting back.
The kind of "totally crazy" to kill yourself at the end, like this guy did?
I feel your pain, but your arguments are very, very flawed.
On 9/11, there was another flight, in which a group of Americans stopped a deadly attack on our nation's government with their bare hands. Meanwhile, the most advanced military in the world was flying in circles, with no idea where to go.
Kids should depend on others to protect them. They're kids. We can argue about what age they should become men, but your argument, in your words, is incorrect.
And by the way, I'm glad that it was 32 people with a damn handgun, and not 320 people with a U-Haul full of fertalizer. I'm not aware of any laws that are in the way of you defending yourself from a 45 MPH pile of explosive shit, but I am aware of several bombings that have killed dozens or hundreds, and I don't think you know of *any* solution to that problem.
A determined killer can take out tens, or even hundreds of victims. No amount of "defense" is going to save you - police state, or personal responsibility.
Now, given that there's no such thing as 100% security, the best thing I know how to do is talk about statistics. And statistically, I believe that America is a good example that more guns does not automatically yield fewer gun deaths. If anything, the statistics correlate in the other direction.
By that, I see 730 Unintentional deaths by firearms in 2003.
By comparison, Drowning (Unintentional) is 3,306. I don't see any available statistics about bathtubs, but I suspect it's nowhere near as high as 730 per year (which would be 22% of all drownings.)
"Another thing to remember is that guns have a great equalizing effect."
54% of children aged 12 years who were victims of homicide were killed by guns, between 1976 and 2004. Unless you want 12-year-olds to start carrying guns, there's no way to equalize that effect.
77.1% of 17-year-olds who were victims of homicide were killed by guns. Should most 17-year-olds be walking around with guns to defend themselves? How else can you equalize that number?
I would not define the founders of the U.S. government as zealots. I think they very, very carefully balanced more variables than I can probably enumerate.
The poster I was responding to said, "I for one simply do not acknowledge that anybody has any intrinsic authority to disarm me, whatever the supposed justification." This lacks any such nuances as, "But, sir, you're boarding a plane," or "When you're visiting your cousin in prison, you need to check your firearm at the front desk," or "Sir, you're about to enter a town-hall meeting with the President. I'm afraid you're going to leave your gun outside."
In other words - what he said was spoken like a true zealot would say it.
I'll vote for the candidate who promises to grant me the right to carry a concealed firearm anywhere I wish, across all states of the nation, because that individual understands the second amendment. (Emphasis added.)
Wrong. If you want to vote for that candidate, I strongly suggest you seek psychiatric help.
Minimally, you should not be allowed to carry a concealed firearm in the following places:
1. On an airplane 2. When touring the White House, or probably any other federal building 3. When visiting someone in prison or in a mental ward 4. When in a business or residence that doesn't want you to have a firearm there 5. At a town-hall meeting with the President
There are probably others. If you want to argue with any of these points, feel free to prove that you're an idiot. If you accept these points, then you accept that there are limits on your rights, and now we're just debating where those limits should be drawn.
Since that line is somewhat unclear, I propose that a national militia is not the same thing as a college campus that just lost the NCAA Final Four, and that a well-regulated militia is not the same thing as a rioting campus, and that a rioting campus is made more dangerous by the presence of any guns (see Kent State).
Second, that candidate can't grant you any rights, as anyone who understands any of the Constitution knows.
If there was justice in the world, doctors would refuse to give flu shots to people who don't believe in evolution. They'd let those who don't believe in evolution suffer the awful consequences of their ignorance.
(Note: this is comedy, not my actual opinion.)
Honestly, though, I detest the lack of gratitude. That people will simultaneously reap the benefits of scientific thought and attack science and scientists.
What you should have replied with was pointing at the KPR Dragon 2.0, because that's basically a certified Tier 1 "It Just Works" system.
The problem I personally have is that it's HDTV only... I need a system like KPR Dragon that's for SDTV. They say one's in the works, but not very soon.
I would have thought the community would be working its ass off to find the cheapest possible off-the-shelf system that you could drop two Hauppauge 150s into, and boom, you're flying.
Like, for instance, does Slashdot think this is a good off-the-shelf system for MythTV?
Dell E521n with Athlon 64 3200+? $481 USD, before I add the two Hauppauge 150s, and plug in a 500GB USB drive...?
According to this guy, it's not 100% effortless... But it sounds like it can be made to work.
PLEASE, Slashdot, impress me by pointing me at the cheapest-possible off-the-shelf that will Just Work!
"How do I convey to the users that, in order to develop the software they want, I need detailed, accurate specs?"
You're absolutely right that it would be a lot easier for you to do it right the first time, if you were handed detailed specs.
But very, very few companies are willing to pay the expense of getting the specs so correct that developers will build it right the first time.
So, what do you do? You iterate. A lot. You try to identify the hard parts, and try to get them as clear as you can. If your users could describe the behavior they wanted exactly, they would just code it.
That's just what a software engineer does - turns desired behavior into a specification so clear that a moron could do it. The computer is supposed to be the moron, not you. Your users are going to give you specifications that are not as clear as you would like, and you are supposed to turn them into specifications that are much more clear (i.e. source code.) That is literally your "value add," and it's why you have a job.
Right, but here's my problem - a soldier is walking down the street in Afghanistan. A guy yells "Death to America!" The soldier grabs him, and POW! he's an enemy alien detained in Gitmo forever.
I 100% agree that some people should be held, and I argue that the guy in my example should not, and I haven't seen any evidence that we're making a good faith effort to tell which of the Gitmo detainees are which. How do you propose we tell which is which? I propose that's a trial. I don't know under which court or which rules, but that's what it is, to me.
I appreciate the way you responded to my post. Thanks.
I think the Geneva Conventions were written by well-intentioned people who knew a world where war waged between nations. I like where you're going with the idea of doing our best to apply the most appropriate laws, possibly Geneva. If there are problems, we should look for them and try to fix them. Or propose Geneva II and hammer it out.
I did think of an alternate way to discuss this one... To the people who think that the Gitmo detainies shouldn't get habeas corpus:
I propose we kill all the Gitmo detainees. If you think they shouldn't be killed, please justify your rationalle.
Whatever justifications people come up with for why we can not deny them their Life, I say equally applies to why we can not deny them their Liberty. We have to figure out how to be just, or we don't deserve the power we have.
Slashdot Mirror
I for one would like to welcome our new Slashdot Robot Overlord, but I can't find it, since the link is biffed in the article.
Anyone know where it really is?
Not so. A black hole only eats things that fall into it. A miniature black hole (the size of a molecule), has a lot of mass, but could actually fall in to the core of a planet and stay there.
I suppose Mars would have a lot more wobble, though.
I know it sounds stupid - but could it be that it was an impact from a miniature black hole?
Not a duplicate article - a duplicate technology that does the same thing as what a group at NYU are doing.
A description, and a nice Quicktime video.
I had a nice video of a demo at a tradeshow, too - but I can't find it right now.
My cell phone has a Camera button on the outside edge. Every now and then, I hear the fake shutter sound that lets me know my cell phone just took a picture of the inside of my pocket.
I'm surprised no one else has mention the worst feature ever: DRM.
BRILLIANT post.
(Score: 117, Insightful)
A moderately crazy person may enter a school today in order to shoot the place up, but you'd have to be totally crazy to attempt such when you know that one out of ten students will be shooting back.
The kind of "totally crazy" to kill yourself at the end, like this guy did?
I feel your pain, but your arguments are very, very flawed.
On 9/11, there was another flight, in which a group of Americans stopped a deadly attack on our nation's government with their bare hands. Meanwhile, the most advanced military in the world was flying in circles, with no idea where to go.
Kids should depend on others to protect them. They're kids. We can argue about what age they should become men, but your argument, in your words, is incorrect.
And by the way, I'm glad that it was 32 people with a damn handgun, and not 320 people with a U-Haul full of fertalizer. I'm not aware of any laws that are in the way of you defending yourself from a 45 MPH pile of explosive shit, but I am aware of several bombings that have killed dozens or hundreds, and I don't think you know of *any* solution to that problem.
A determined killer can take out tens, or even hundreds of victims. No amount of "defense" is going to save you - police state, or personal responsibility.
Now, given that there's no such thing as 100% security, the best thing I know how to do is talk about statistics. And statistically, I believe that America is a good example that more guns does not automatically yield fewer gun deaths. If anything, the statistics correlate in the other direction.
There are less that 100 accidental deaths a year from firearms in the US. You are more likely to drown in your bathtub.
I think your numbers are way off. From the CDC:
Table 18, Number of deaths in the U.S. in 2003, by Firearms:
Unintentional - 730
Suicide - 16,907
Homicide - 11,920
Undetermined - 232
Legal intervention / war - 347
TOTAL FIREARM: 30,136
By that, I see 730 Unintentional deaths by firearms in 2003.
By comparison, Drowning (Unintentional) is 3,306. I don't see any available statistics about bathtubs, but I suspect it's nowhere near as high as 730 per year (which would be 22% of all drownings.)
Not to quip too much, but...
"Another thing to remember is that guns have a great equalizing effect."
54% of children aged 12 years who were victims of homicide were killed by guns, between 1976 and 2004. Unless you want 12-year-olds to start carrying guns, there's no way to equalize that effect.
77.1% of 17-year-olds who were victims of homicide were killed by guns. Should most 17-year-olds be walking around with guns to defend themselves? How else can you equalize that number?
By... trying... to reduce the number of guns?
How much better of a background check can you have than being in the Ohio National Guard?
And yet those guys killed 4 students at Kent State.
An honest question: should people be able to carry on a plane?
I would not define the founders of the U.S. government as zealots. I think they very, very carefully balanced more variables than I can probably enumerate.
The poster I was responding to said, "I for one simply do not acknowledge that anybody has any intrinsic authority to disarm me, whatever the supposed justification." This lacks any such nuances as, "But, sir, you're boarding a plane," or "When you're visiting your cousin in prison, you need to check your firearm at the front desk," or "Sir, you're about to enter a town-hall meeting with the President. I'm afraid you're going to leave your gun outside."
In other words - what he said was spoken like a true zealot would say it.
I'll vote for the candidate who promises to grant me the right to carry a concealed firearm anywhere I wish, across all states of the nation, because that individual understands the second amendment. (Emphasis added.)
Wrong. If you want to vote for that candidate, I strongly suggest you seek psychiatric help.
Minimally, you should not be allowed to carry a concealed firearm in the following places:
1. On an airplane
2. When touring the White House, or probably any other federal building
3. When visiting someone in prison or in a mental ward
4. When in a business or residence that doesn't want you to have a firearm there
5. At a town-hall meeting with the President
There are probably others. If you want to argue with any of these points, feel free to prove that you're an idiot. If you accept these points, then you accept that there are limits on your rights, and now we're just debating where those limits should be drawn.
Since that line is somewhat unclear, I propose that a national militia is not the same thing as a college campus that just lost the NCAA Final Four, and that a well-regulated militia is not the same thing as a rioting campus, and that a rioting campus is made more dangerous by the presence of any guns (see Kent State).
Second, that candidate can't grant you any rights, as anyone who understands any of the Constitution knows.
The *outcome* - in this case - might actually have been worse if everybody had guns... [b]ut regardless of that... it's a principle issue.
Written like a true zealot.
If the makers of Myst aren't thinking about a Wii port, they're nuts.
However, the "realtime FPS" style Myst shouldn't be what they're thinking about. I don't think, anyway.
If there was justice in the world, doctors would refuse to give flu shots to people who don't believe in evolution. They'd let those who don't believe in evolution suffer the awful consequences of their ignorance.
(Note: this is comedy, not my actual opinion.)
Honestly, though, I detest the lack of gratitude. That people will simultaneously reap the benefits of scientific thought and attack science and scientists.
Well, just get the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud out of Limited Beta, and they've pretty much already built my dream machine.
The latency is a little lousy, but the horse power is awesome, the bandwidth is pretty good, and the storage space is effectively infinite.
And then I guess I'll take a fully loaded Alienware Area-51 ALX as a front-end for it at about, what, $12,000? Sounds good to me.
I would bring Granite Gear*. They're not electronics, but they're definitely hi-tech backpacks and other outdoor gear.
* Standard disclaimer - I'm a relative of two of the three owners.
You can also just buy a VGA to S-Video, if I'm not mistaken - they're a bit pricey...
How do you get video out? Just the VGA on the motherboard?
What you should have replied with was pointing at the KPR Dragon 2.0, because that's basically a certified Tier 1 "It Just Works" system.
The problem I personally have is that it's HDTV only... I need a system like KPR Dragon that's for SDTV. They say one's in the works, but not very soon.
I would have thought the community would be working its ass off to find the cheapest possible off-the-shelf system that you could drop two Hauppauge 150s into, and boom, you're flying.
Like, for instance, does Slashdot think this is a good off-the-shelf system for MythTV?
Dell E521n with Athlon 64 3200+? $481 USD, before I add the two Hauppauge 150s, and plug in a 500GB USB drive...?
According to this guy, it's not 100% effortless... But it sounds like it can be made to work.
PLEASE, Slashdot, impress me by pointing me at the cheapest-possible off-the-shelf that will Just Work!
"How do I convey to the users that, in order to develop the software they want, I need detailed, accurate specs?"
You're absolutely right that it would be a lot easier for you to do it right the first time, if you were handed detailed specs.
But very, very few companies are willing to pay the expense of getting the specs so correct that developers will build it right the first time.
So, what do you do? You iterate. A lot. You try to identify the hard parts, and try to get them as clear as you can. If your users could describe the behavior they wanted exactly, they would just code it.
That's just what a software engineer does - turns desired behavior into a specification so clear that a moron could do it. The computer is supposed to be the moron, not you. Your users are going to give you specifications that are not as clear as you would like, and you are supposed to turn them into specifications that are much more clear (i.e. source code.) That is literally your "value add," and it's why you have a job.
Right, but here's my problem - a soldier is walking down the street in Afghanistan. A guy yells "Death to America!" The soldier grabs him, and POW! he's an enemy alien detained in Gitmo forever.
I 100% agree that some people should be held, and I argue that the guy in my example should not, and I haven't seen any evidence that we're making a good faith effort to tell which of the Gitmo detainees are which. How do you propose we tell which is which? I propose that's a trial. I don't know under which court or which rules, but that's what it is, to me.
I appreciate the way you responded to my post. Thanks.
I think the Geneva Conventions were written by well-intentioned people who knew a world where war waged between nations. I like where you're going with the idea of doing our best to apply the most appropriate laws, possibly Geneva. If there are problems, we should look for them and try to fix them. Or propose Geneva II and hammer it out.
I did think of an alternate way to discuss this one... To the people who think that the Gitmo detainies shouldn't get habeas corpus:
I propose we kill all the Gitmo detainees. If you think they shouldn't be killed, please justify your rationalle.
Whatever justifications people come up with for why we can not deny them their Life, I say equally applies to why we can not deny them their Liberty. We have to figure out how to be just, or we don't deserve the power we have.