Stupid... cost is high, value is minimal, chances of it being maintainable are negative.... How about spending a few billion giving Los Angeles a decent subway system to cut down on smog and traffic? Or spending the money on better water treatment facilities to keep our oceans clean? Or just saving the money since both state and federal debt is out of control? *sigh* Thank goodness we have "stimulus" programs like this.... NOT.
Bummer.. over the years, with all the contributions that Google has given to OSS (and received from it). What happened here? This is silly, they KNOW the benefits of keeping code open. How can anyone argue "we won't open the code because it's "broken"?" If I could name all the great open source projects that had "broken" code when they started and now are incredible I would.. let's just name a few: The Linux Kernel, Apache (a "patchy" web server.. name says it all), snort, and on and on an on.... What better way to foster development and maturity of code than to open it to the community?
Typical.. can't get customers to use your product? Stop supporting other versions and FORCE them to buy your product if they want support. Great business plan... not very moral, but if you can't innovate and get users by producing a superior product.....
Nope, it will have "WebDirectX", the proprietary, lock-the-user-into-a-single-platform and closed 3D option... Of course, it is released AFTER WebGL has been out for a while.
Since when is questioning THEORIES "Anti-Science"? Sounds like someone feels threatened.
"public school teachers who want to teach "scientific weaknesses" about "controversial scientific topics" including evolution, climate change, human cloning and â" ambiguously â" "other scientific topics" may do so without fear of reprimand"... DUH! That is what teaching is... showing the strengths and the weaknesses of different ideas and attempting to prove or disprove them. I'm sure Copernicus would have been considered "Anti-Science" by those who don't want theories taught as such, but would rather they be taught as fact.
Does it mean "We've been slashdotted", our nifty new technology relies on active-x and therefore can't scale for beans.... Not to mention it's lack of security.
"Java-uppdatering
Dina drivrutiner Ãr inte uppdaterade. FÃr att kunna kÃra "hitta.se 3D" behÃver du uppdatera till senaste drivrutinerna.
Mer information om vad som krÃvs fÃr att kÃra hitta.se 3D hittar du i FrÃ¥gor & svar"
BTW, Both sides of the argument are full of shit. Having been to many of the countries in Europe (and spent significant time in some) I have seen that most European countries are much less concerned about the environment than the US is, they require significantly lower standards and allow vehicles to smog freely.
Interesting.. Darwin didn't consider his own theory "true science".
[In a letter to Asa Gray, a Harvard professor of biology, Darwin wrote:] "I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science."--*Charles Darwin, quoted in *N.C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation (1979), p. 2 [University of Chicago book].
"Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses incompletely informed biologists, misleads them, and inspires fallacious interpretations . . . Through use and abuse of hidden postulates, of bold, often ill-founded extrapolations, a pseudoscience has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of biology and is leading astray many biochemists and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case."--*Pierre P. de Grasse, The Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 202.
"The fact is that the evidence was so patchy one hundred years ago that even Darwin himself had increasing doubts as to the validity of his views, and the only aspect of his theory which has received any support over the past century is where it applies to microevolutionary phenomena. His general theory, that all life on earth had originated and evolved by a gradual successive accumulation of fortuitous mutations, is still, as it was in Darwin's time, a highly speculative hypothesis entirely without direct factual support and very far from that self-evident axiom some of its more aggressive advocates would have us believe."--*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986), p. 77.
Yeah, and those "ignorant" "religious zealots" formed the most powerful nation in the world. The nation from which came electricity, the lightbulb, the phonograph, most of the technology found in modern computers, etc.. not bad for some "ignorant" "religious zealots":)
A theory has not yet been proven. However, some theories are stronger than others. Gravity has evidence that supports it. Evolution (between species) is lacking such evidence. I don't know that I'd call a theory a fact.
Sorry to dissapoint... We are a Democracy here in the States and therefore, the majority decides things like what get's printed on our money. America is NOT a country of athiests. Just ask the 90+% that beleive in God. Should everyone else have their freedoms held back because it bothers you? NO. When the founders of this nation came here, they wanted a nation that ensured religious freedom, NOT NON-RELEGION. In other words, the "separation of church and state" is meant to keep the State out of the Church, NOT the opposite as many athiests would like us to beleive.
When visiting the music site, it states "Sorry, we can no longer support your OS.. Windows 98/me/nt are no longer supported" (or something to that extent). Classic.. Not only do require IE, they don't even support most Microsoft OS's. Sad, but typical. Lazy coding and/or politics force sales of XP/2003/Vista. The good thing is that no one uses Walmart to purchase music or video (and even less will now).
While Microsoft claims to be a great innovator, they are in reality a great copier. It's almost humorous that the same company that is so against piracy has stolen/copied almost everything they market. When I think of Microsoft, I think marketing.. not technology or innovation. Products that Microsoft would like to claim are innovative:
Word == Word Perfect was better until MS cloned it (and made it difficult for WP to operate with the OS) Excel == Lotus " "
IE == Netscape
Windows == Mac/X-Window/Xerox
And on and on and on.. C# (Java), Pocket PC (Palm), DirectX (OpenGL)....
What makes a company great is the ability to contribute new ideas to the world and improve technology. IBM, Google, Netscape, VMware, Sun, Novell, Apple, Cisco and many other tech companies have done this. Microsoft has stifled innovation by creating a monopoly based on stealing ideas from others.
As far as other "innovation" by Microsoft, we have the way that Microsoft has consistently held other true innovators back. The fact that if someone comes up with a great idea, Microsoft will copy it and then put it on their OS (which holds a monopolistic share of the market) discourages many from expending the effort.
For this world to continue to advance in the best way possible, we need to reward the innovators.. not the imitators.
Slashdot Mirror
Stupid... cost is high, value is minimal, chances of it being maintainable are negative.... How about spending a few billion giving Los Angeles a decent subway system to cut down on smog and traffic? Or spending the money on better water treatment facilities to keep our oceans clean? Or just saving the money since both state and federal debt is out of control? *sigh* Thank goodness we have "stimulus" programs like this.... NOT.
"except in cases arising in... public danger" A terrorist helping recruit crazies in another country certainly is a "public danger".
Calling Anwar al-Awlaki "an American born cleric" is like calling the devil "an angel that likes warm temperatures".
I'm not a fanboy of Obama and think he has done many many things wrong while president, this however isn't one of them.
It's not.
Bummer.. over the years, with all the contributions that Google has given to OSS (and received from it). What happened here? This is silly, they KNOW the benefits of keeping code open. How can anyone argue "we won't open the code because it's "broken"?" If I could name all the great open source projects that had "broken" code when they started and now are incredible I would.. let's just name a few: The Linux Kernel, Apache (a "patchy" web server.. name says it all), snort, and on and on an on.... What better way to foster development and maturity of code than to open it to the community?
Typical.. can't get customers to use your product? Stop supporting other versions and FORCE them to buy your product if they want support. Great business plan... not very moral, but if you can't innovate and get users by producing a superior product.....
Nope, it will have "WebDirectX", the proprietary, lock-the-user-into-a-single-platform and closed 3D option... Of course, it is released AFTER WebGL has been out for a while.
Hopefully practical is more important and better marketing to sales people.
Since when is questioning THEORIES "Anti-Science"? Sounds like someone feels threatened.
"public school teachers who want to teach "scientific weaknesses" about "controversial scientific topics" including evolution, climate change, human cloning and â" ambiguously â" "other scientific topics" may do so without fear of reprimand" ... DUH! That is what teaching is... showing the strengths and the weaknesses of different ideas and attempting to prove or disprove them. I'm sure Copernicus would have been considered "Anti-Science" by those who don't want theories taught as such, but would rather they be taught as fact.
Slashdot readers are to politics as....
a. water is to snow
b. sun is to heat
c. barney is to rubble
d. politicians are to technical
The answer is "D".
It cracks me up when Slashdot goes political almost as much as when politicians try and get involved with technical discussion.
The "success" of this endeavor will be short lived. It will be on every software sharing site and etc in no time.
Does it mean "We've been slashdotted", our nifty new technology relies on active-x and therefore can't scale for beans.... Not to mention it's lack of security.
"Java-uppdatering
Dina drivrutiner Ãr inte uppdaterade. FÃr att kunna kÃra "hitta.se 3D" behÃver du uppdatera till senaste drivrutinerna.
Mer information om vad som krÃvs fÃr att kÃra hitta.se 3D hittar du i FrÃ¥gor & svar"
BTW, Both sides of the argument are full of shit. Having been to many of the countries in Europe (and spent significant time in some) I have seen that most European countries are much less concerned about the environment than the US is, they require significantly lower standards and allow vehicles to smog freely.
a rt.html
Why not also test your global warming knowledge. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/st
Test your Global Warming knowledge:
a rt.html
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/st
Counting the numbers from the pictures at the site... I guess at Microsoft, they need a 1-1 Developer/"Manager" ratio. Crazy.
IF they buy a PC from a major manufacturer..
That is why we like Linux/OSS. A Free (no pun intended) market is best for us all.
Interesting.. Darwin didn't consider his own theory "true science".
[In a letter to Asa Gray, a Harvard professor of biology, Darwin wrote:] "I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science."--*Charles Darwin, quoted in *N.C. Gillespie, Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation (1979), p. 2 [University of Chicago book].
"Present-day ultra-Darwinism, which is so sure of itself, impresses incompletely informed biologists, misleads them, and inspires fallacious interpretations . . . Through use and abuse of hidden postulates, of bold, often ill-founded extrapolations, a pseudoscience has been created. It is taking root in the very heart of biology and is leading astray many biochemists and biologists, who sincerely believe that the accuracy of fundamental concepts has been demonstrated, which is not the case."--*Pierre P. de Grasse, The Evolution of Living Organisms (1977), p. 202.
"The fact is that the evidence was so patchy one hundred years ago that even Darwin himself had increasing doubts as to the validity of his views, and the only aspect of his theory which has received any support over the past century is where it applies to microevolutionary phenomena. His general theory, that all life on earth had originated and evolved by a gradual successive accumulation of fortuitous mutations, is still, as it was in Darwin's time, a highly speculative hypothesis entirely without direct factual support and very far from that self-evident axiom some of its more aggressive advocates would have us believe."--*Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986), p. 77.
That is your opinion. You are entitled to the right to be wrong *pun intended*.
Yeah, and those "ignorant" "religious zealots" formed the most powerful nation in the world. The nation from which came electricity, the lightbulb, the phonograph, most of the technology found in modern computers, etc.. not bad for some "ignorant" "religious zealots" :)
A theory has not yet been proven. However, some theories are stronger than others. Gravity has evidence that supports it. Evolution (between species) is lacking such evidence. I don't know that I'd call a theory a fact.
Sorry to dissapoint... We are a Democracy here in the States and therefore, the majority decides things like what get's printed on our money. America is NOT a country of athiests. Just ask the 90+% that beleive in God. Should everyone else have their freedoms held back because it bothers you? NO. When the founders of this nation came here, they wanted a nation that ensured religious freedom, NOT NON-RELEGION. In other words, the "separation of church and state" is meant to keep the State out of the Church, NOT the opposite as many athiests would like us to beleive.
Why is this unfortunate? Evolution is a theory. In science, it is better to focus on the known facts (as it seems is beginning to happen).
When visiting the music site, it states "Sorry, we can no longer support your OS.. Windows 98/me/nt are no longer supported" (or something to that extent). Classic.. Not only do require IE, they don't even support most Microsoft OS's. Sad, but typical. Lazy coding and/or politics force sales of XP/2003/Vista. The good thing is that no one uses Walmart to purchase music or video (and even less will now).
While Microsoft claims to be a great innovator, they are in reality a great copier. It's almost humorous that the same company that is so against piracy has stolen/copied almost everything they market. When I think of Microsoft, I think marketing.. not technology or innovation. Products that Microsoft would like to claim are innovative:
Word == Word Perfect was better until MS cloned it (and made it difficult for WP to operate with the OS)
Excel == Lotus " "
IE == Netscape
Windows == Mac/X-Window/Xerox
And on and on and on.. C# (Java), Pocket PC (Palm), DirectX (OpenGL)....
What makes a company great is the ability to contribute new ideas to the world and improve technology. IBM, Google, Netscape, VMware, Sun, Novell, Apple, Cisco and many other tech companies have done this. Microsoft has stifled innovation by creating a monopoly based on stealing ideas from others.
As far as other "innovation" by Microsoft, we have the way that Microsoft has consistently held other true innovators back. The fact that if someone comes up with a great idea, Microsoft will copy it and then put it on their OS (which holds a monopolistic share of the market) discourages many from expending the effort.
For this world to continue to advance in the best way possible, we need to reward the innovators.. not the imitators.
What is he now? A washed up ex-vice president? Sorry, but his "wisdom" isn't any more impressive than his speaking style.