You missed the point. In the situation you describe, you can tell when people aren't given you their attention: whenever their cameras are off. The beauty of the voice-only telephone is that there is no way to tell. Even if people buy this, they will constantly be denying that they have, to avoid revealing that they only turned off the camera so they could take a poo while on the phone.
video games were not around then...Hitler was a grown man. He knew right from wrong, but he did wrong...I don't feel the kids were pure evil
Well, there you have it. Hitler knew right from wrong, and chose wrong due to his evil. The kids did not, however...they were misguided. So what went wrong? Are all kids at that age incapable of distinguishing right from wrong? I think not. But those who get involved in seeing fictional violence as entertainment are only one small step away from trying the real thing. I'm sorry, the price is just too high, as we have seen demonstrated beyond doubt.
David Foster Wallace described, in Infinite Jest, why video phones are unlikely to ever catch on, and I don't think he was the first. The great thing about the telephone is that one needn't give the person on the other end of the line one's complete attention.
On the telephone, you can look through a magazine, clip your toenails, read you email, or make a sandwich, all without the other person suspecting that you are not hanging on his or her every word. Meanwhile, you are free to maintain the illusion that the other person is giving you their undivided attention.
With video phones, it would immediately become clear that we busy 21st century people don't have the time or patience to be attentive throughout an electronic conversation. It also would make answering the phone in one's underwear riskier, and might make people feel like they needed to be made up and dressed well when in their own homes.
So why not just go back in time and try to give Hitler a loving home, so he wouldn't kill all those people? Are some people just pure evil, deserving of death even before they do wrong? And don't video games make them that way? I think you see my point.
It's sad to see Red Hat giving in so easily. I'd always found some amount of personal pride in seeing a Linux-based company doing relatively well, financially. And now they let a couple evil and greedy patent abusers to walk right over them. I guess Red Hat really is the Microsoft of Linux.
Hopefully, another company will come along and take their place. I'm not optimistic, but I'm hopeful. Can this really be the end of Linux?
Im glad somewon is as conserned as me with the state of educational technology. I look forwerd to reeding aboute all the good teachers college's from the smart peopel hear on Slashdott.
Sony did not shoot itself in the foot with Betamax. They've been selling VHS to one market and Betamax to another for years. That's called a win-win. Most consumers don't deal with Betamax these days, but it's been a mainstay of professional video production since its introduction. The only reason they're discontinuing it now is that digital video has just recently become good enough to replace it. Sony wisely decided to focus its efforts on beating competing DV equipment manufacturers, rather than invest in both technologies and have to compete with themselves, as well.
If a religion claims that there is fewer or greater than one God, that his name is not Allah, and/or Mohammed is his prophet, then it is false. I have documentation to support this.
The plans of the Columbine killers weren't "real" either. Until, of course, they actually walked into their school and started killing people.
If you could go back in time and kill Hitler before he came to power, would you do it?
Would you have stopped the Columbine massacre from happening, if you could have?
I don't think we have a choice in this case. We are morally required to act against violence by eliminating the root cause, in this case violent video games.
Wow, this technology sounds incredible. Anyone who's run a packet sniffer on even a smallish office LAN (for debugging network problems, I swear!:) knows that it's nearly impossible to keep all of the different ports, protocols, and IP addresses straight.
It'll be great to see what law enforcement can do with this. I imagine if we'd had this kind of tech in place a year ago, we might have averted 9/11 altogether, so maybe this will help ensure it never happens again. Imagine the power: wondering if Tom R. O'Layman is funnelling money to the IRA? Just click a button and check out his emails, phone calls, and web history. It looks like we're headed toward a new era of public safety.
I am normally not a proponent of censorship, but in this situation, I think it would have been a good idea for the scientists involved to keep this under their hats. The next obvious step of experimentation will be trying to activate this gene in apes, which may well produce apes of human intelligence. Hm, I think I've seen a movie about that... Whatever happened to the notion of personal responsibility in Science? These guys will be happy to condemn humanity to slavery under superintelligent apes, as long as they get their Nobel Prize. What would Einstein say?
Is this really necessary? With 100GB hard drives becoming more commonplace, I think we're at the limit of what normal users need out of hardware. There is just no use whatsoever for 50GB removable discs. In 10 years, we will all still be using DVD+RW. Drives will be a lot faster, sure, but history has shown that there is just no application that requires more than the ample 4.7GB of removable storage provided by DVD technology.
The problem with the whole domain name system is that it has been abused to no end. URLs aren't supposed to make sense; the address box in your web browser is not supposed to be a substitute for a search engine. A good analogy could be made to email addresses. No one expects to be able to email my_neighbor_john@wholived.nextdoor.tome.whenIwas6. com and have it work. Instead, we all have address books so we don't have to remember everyone's email address. Likewise, in the web world, we have bookmarks or Favorites.
So what should domains be? Well, just what they sound like, "domains" of servers. Go.com does this right. They have a web server for espn.go.com and another for abcnews.go.com. Don't want to remember those? Fine, then bookmark espn.go.com and call it "sportz."
Registering names for domains that will only ever have websites is also extremely stupid. What is at ftp.hotornot.com? Are there any groups at news.onion.com?
In conclusion, I will concede that the.org domain name is priced as under a monopoly (since it is controlled by one). But you do not need a domain name to have a website. Get a subdomain wherever your site is hosted, and you'll be fine.
While it's good to read about some Linux hackers (not crackers) who don't fit the stereotypical "GNU hippie" mold, I wonder whether this might have a negative effect on the position of Linux in the marketplace. It seems to me that Linux has always to some extent banked on the "outsider" images of its users and community. If it starts to look like we've all turned into suits, then we lose what little appeal we have. So don't shave your beards yet...;-)D
Actually, from what I've read, the about box just had a list of the main authors, with no allusions to copyright. They are trying to spin it like a copyright notice was removed, but as far as I can see, that just isn't the case. In fact, it appears to be more like a simple advertisement, and forcing Red Hat to leave such an advertisement intact would directly violate the [L]GPL.
It depends what you mean by "from the community." Most open source coders are well known within their niches (as in, on the mailing lists for their own projects). But if you want to force people to show a splash screen with your face on it in every derivative work, then by all means, specify it in your license.
Now I just can't believe this. People slave away on their open source software "as a hobby" and "for the community." They claim they don't want any recognition in return. Then as soon as someone branches their app, they get all self-righteous.
Reality check: you are not guaranteed anything beyond what is spelled out in your license. None of this appears to violate the [L]GPL, so you brought in upon yourselves. If you didn't want someone to rebrand your app, then you should have gone with a more restrictive license. Red Hat owes you nothing because you told them they could have your work for free. You can't have it both ways, folks.
I couldn't agree with you more. The Comman Man (aided by the clueless media) seems to have a fascination with what I like to call "voodoo Science." The more outlandish, the better. While real physics has always been about rigorous (and vigorous) lab work, the popular image of physics, and Science as a whole, has strayed from this considerably.
Witness, for example, the popular celebration of Einstein's thought experiments. The average layman is under the impression that Einstein reached his great intellectual climaxes by just sitting and thinking about things, maybe over a cup of hot chocolate. What people don't see is the hours of experimentation (real experimentation) as he tried to verify and correct the results of his thought experiments.
So why is it like that? Are people just stupid? I don't think so. My best explanation is that people are looking for something to but their faith into, to believe in. Since the collapse of the Catholic Church in the times of Galileo Galilei, there has been a vacuum where religious fervor once stood. Science (or this fantastical mockery of Science) has filled that void, uncomfortably. We will not see great physics (and hence time machines) capture the imaginations of the world's peoples again until organized religion can once more comfort their spirits.
It's an interesting question, and one to which I'll come right out and admit I have no good answer. Chemistry is unique in the Science world, as "knowing" chemistry seems to mostly involve memorizing tables of information (or at least being good at looking things up). The principles are easy, but there's not much room for reasoning. Experiments in chemistry are by and large trial and error affairs, which can be frustrating to the new student.
In short, if you haven't really "gotten" chemistry yet, then I'd propose that you probably never will. Chemistry just doesn't have a lot to offer the curious layman. Biology and physics are where the really cool "chemistry" gets done, and bookstores abound with good material on those subjects.
Re:Dependent on the weather?
on
Solar Surgery
·
· Score: 0
There are some potential bugs in your sig. What if yardsToFirst is one greater than tooMany? Then you should still punt, but your code would not. Also, By incrementing punt to indicate punting, you necessitate checking it against a stored previous value later in the execution, when the punt would actually be performed. If there are other conditions that might make you punt, then you end up incrementing it too high. Better to just have a flag punt that starts at 0 and gets set to 1 whenever you discover a punting situation. Then, when you actually make the call to doPunt(), or whatever, you won't need to do any math, and can just add the flag to the previous punt count (if, indeed, you still need the previous punt count). Thus: if(down==4 && yardsToFirst >= tooMany) punt = 1;
OS X Server is overkill? If you want to run a server, then you need a server OS. Linux PPC would do nicely, I'd imagine. Or you could just piece together a $200 PC (it needn't have a monitor) and stick it there on the network. Wouldn't take more than an afternoon. LDAP is all XML based, so you can edit everything by hand and view the results in Mozilla. Easy.
By the way, this marks my 1000th post here on Slashdot (not counting those posted as Anonymous Coward). Quick word of thanks to everyone who makes this possible, and by that I mean the users, the people who post and moderate comments. Slashdot has become an icon (no pun intended) on the Internet, and a beacon in the Linux and Open Source communities. So, if you're reading this right now, pat yourself on the back for a job well done. Let's make the next 1000 posts as great as the first 1000.
South America is very close to Antarctica. So yes, most indigenous South Poleans would indeed be considered South Americans, ethnically, if not geographically.
As for wires melting the ice, I think you're neglecting waste heat. In elementary school, you might have done the experiment where you lay a string, weighted on both ends, across a block of ice, and observe as it works its way through the ice. A wire would do the same thing, but faster, thanks to what little energy leaked through the heat shielding.
Slashdot Mirror
I hear they have porn on the TV these days...
Oh, wait, you mean all the hot girls who will be calling you so they can strip while they watch you leer? Keep dreaming...
You missed the point. In the situation you describe, you can tell when people aren't given you their attention: whenever their cameras are off. The beauty of the voice-only telephone is that there is no way to tell. Even if people buy this, they will constantly be denying that they have, to avoid revealing that they only turned off the camera so they could take a poo while on the phone.
That is probably because you enjoy using Lunix and reading Slashdot. You should try human contact, it's rumored to work wonders, you vile pervert.
video games were not around then...Hitler was a grown man. He knew right from wrong, but he did wrong...I don't feel the kids were pure evil
Well, there you have it. Hitler knew right from wrong, and chose wrong due to his evil. The kids did not, however...they were misguided. So what went wrong? Are all kids at that age incapable of distinguishing right from wrong? I think not. But those who get involved in seeing fictional violence as entertainment are only one small step away from trying the real thing. I'm sorry, the price is just too high, as we have seen demonstrated beyond doubt.
David Foster Wallace described, in Infinite Jest, why video phones are unlikely to ever catch on, and I don't think he was the first. The great thing about the telephone is that one needn't give the person on the other end of the line one's complete attention.
On the telephone, you can look through a magazine, clip your toenails, read you email, or make a sandwich, all without the other person suspecting that you are not hanging on his or her every word. Meanwhile, you are free to maintain the illusion that the other person is giving you their undivided attention.
With video phones, it would immediately become clear that we busy 21st century people don't have the time or patience to be attentive throughout an electronic conversation. It also would make answering the phone in one's underwear riskier, and might make people feel like they needed to be made up and dressed well when in their own homes.
So why not just go back in time and try to give Hitler a loving home, so he wouldn't kill all those people? Are some people just pure evil, deserving of death even before they do wrong? And don't video games make them that way? I think you see my point.
It's sad to see Red Hat giving in so easily. I'd always found some amount of personal pride in seeing a Linux-based company doing relatively well, financially. And now they let a couple evil and greedy patent abusers to walk right over them. I guess Red Hat really is the Microsoft of Linux.
Hopefully, another company will come along and take their place. I'm not optimistic, but I'm hopeful. Can this really be the end of Linux?
Im glad somewon is as conserned as me with the state of educational technology. I look forwerd to reeding aboute all the good teachers college's from the smart peopel hear on Slashdott.
Sony did not shoot itself in the foot with Betamax. They've been selling VHS to one market and Betamax to another for years. That's called a win-win. Most consumers don't deal with Betamax these days, but it's been a mainstay of professional video production since its introduction. The only reason they're discontinuing it now is that digital video has just recently become good enough to replace it. Sony wisely decided to focus its efforts on beating competing DV equipment manufacturers, rather than invest in both technologies and have to compete with themselves, as well.
If a religion claims that there is fewer or greater than one God, that his name is not Allah, and/or Mohammed is his prophet, then it is false. I have documentation to support this.
The plans of the Columbine killers weren't "real" either. Until, of course, they actually walked into their school and started killing people.
If you could go back in time and kill Hitler before he came to power, would you do it?
Would you have stopped the Columbine massacre from happening, if you could have?
I don't think we have a choice in this case. We are morally required to act against violence by eliminating the root cause, in this case violent video games.
Wow, this technology sounds incredible. Anyone who's run a packet sniffer on even a smallish office LAN (for debugging network problems, I swear! :) knows that it's nearly impossible to keep all of the different ports, protocols, and IP addresses straight.
It'll be great to see what law enforcement can do with this. I imagine if we'd had this kind of tech in place a year ago, we might have averted 9/11 altogether, so maybe this will help ensure it never happens again. Imagine the power: wondering if Tom R. O'Layman is funnelling money to the IRA? Just click a button and check out his emails, phone calls, and web history. It looks like we're headed toward a new era of public safety.
I am normally not a proponent of censorship, but in this situation, I think it would have been a good idea for the scientists involved to keep this under their hats. The next obvious step of experimentation will be trying to activate this gene in apes, which may well produce apes of human intelligence. Hm, I think I've seen a movie about that... Whatever happened to the notion of personal responsibility in Science? These guys will be happy to condemn humanity to slavery under superintelligent apes, as long as they get their Nobel Prize. What would Einstein say?
Is this really necessary? With 100GB hard drives becoming more commonplace, I think we're at the limit of what normal users need out of hardware. There is just no use whatsoever for 50GB removable discs. In 10 years, we will all still be using DVD+RW. Drives will be a lot faster, sure, but history has shown that there is just no application that requires more than the ample 4.7GB of removable storage provided by DVD technology.
The problem with the whole domain name system is that it has been abused to no end. URLs aren't supposed to make sense; the address box in your web browser is not supposed to be a substitute for a search engine. A good analogy could be made to email addresses. No one expects to be able to email my_neighbor_john@wholived.nextdoor.tome.whenIwas6. com and have it work. Instead, we all have address books so we don't have to remember everyone's email address. Likewise, in the web world, we have bookmarks or Favorites.
.org domain name is priced as under a monopoly (since it is controlled by one). But you do not need a domain name to have a website. Get a subdomain wherever your site is hosted, and you'll be fine.
So what should domains be? Well, just what they sound like, "domains" of servers. Go.com does this right. They have a web server for espn.go.com and another for abcnews.go.com. Don't want to remember those? Fine, then bookmark espn.go.com and call it "sportz."
Registering names for domains that will only ever have websites is also extremely stupid. What is at ftp.hotornot.com? Are there any groups at news.onion.com?
In conclusion, I will concede that the
While it's good to read about some Linux hackers (not crackers) who don't fit the stereotypical "GNU hippie" mold, I wonder whether this might have a negative effect on the position of Linux in the marketplace. It seems to me that Linux has always to some extent banked on the "outsider" images of its users and community. If it starts to look like we've all turned into suits, then we lose what little appeal we have. So don't shave your beards yet... ;-)D
(that's me winking, with a beard!)
Actually, from what I've read, the about box just had a list of the main authors, with no allusions to copyright. They are trying to spin it like a copyright notice was removed, but as far as I can see, that just isn't the case. In fact, it appears to be more like a simple advertisement, and forcing Red Hat to leave such an advertisement intact would directly violate the [L]GPL.
It depends what you mean by "from the community." Most open source coders are well known within their niches (as in, on the mailing lists for their own projects). But if you want to force people to show a splash screen with your face on it in every derivative work, then by all means, specify it in your license.
Now I just can't believe this. People slave away on their open source software "as a hobby" and "for the community." They claim they don't want any recognition in return. Then as soon as someone branches their app, they get all self-righteous.
Reality check: you are not guaranteed anything beyond what is spelled out in your license. None of this appears to violate the [L]GPL, so you brought in upon yourselves. If you didn't want someone to rebrand your app, then you should have gone with a more restrictive license. Red Hat owes you nothing because you told them they could have your work for free. You can't have it both ways, folks.
I couldn't agree with you more. The Comman Man (aided by the clueless media) seems to have a fascination with what I like to call "voodoo Science." The more outlandish, the better. While real physics has always been about rigorous (and vigorous) lab work, the popular image of physics, and Science as a whole, has strayed from this considerably.
Witness, for example, the popular celebration of Einstein's thought experiments. The average layman is under the impression that Einstein reached his great intellectual climaxes by just sitting and thinking about things, maybe over a cup of hot chocolate. What people don't see is the hours of experimentation (real experimentation) as he tried to verify and correct the results of his thought experiments.
So why is it like that? Are people just stupid? I don't think so. My best explanation is that people are looking for something to but their faith into, to believe in. Since the collapse of the Catholic Church in the times of Galileo Galilei, there has been a vacuum where religious fervor once stood. Science (or this fantastical mockery of Science) has filled that void, uncomfortably. We will not see great physics (and hence time machines) capture the imaginations of the world's peoples again until organized religion can once more comfort their spirits.
Best wishes in your efforts.
It's an interesting question, and one to which I'll come right out and admit I have no good answer. Chemistry is unique in the Science world, as "knowing" chemistry seems to mostly involve memorizing tables of information (or at least being good at looking things up). The principles are easy, but there's not much room for reasoning. Experiments in chemistry are by and large trial and error affairs, which can be frustrating to the new student.
In short, if you haven't really "gotten" chemistry yet, then I'd propose that you probably never will. Chemistry just doesn't have a lot to offer the curious layman. Biology and physics are where the really cool "chemistry" gets done, and bookstores abound with good material on those subjects.
There are some potential bugs in your sig. What if yardsToFirst is one greater than tooMany? Then you should still punt, but your code would not. Also, By incrementing punt to indicate punting, you necessitate checking it against a stored previous value later in the execution, when the punt would actually be performed. If there are other conditions that might make you punt, then you end up incrementing it too high. Better to just have a flag punt that starts at 0 and gets set to 1 whenever you discover a punting situation. Then, when you actually make the call to doPunt(), or whatever, you won't need to do any math, and can just add the flag to the previous punt count (if, indeed, you still need the previous punt count). Thus:
if(down==4 && yardsToFirst >= tooMany) punt = 1;
Linux PPC costs $0. They call it "Free Software," it's all the rage these days.
OS X Server is overkill? If you want to run a server, then you need a server OS. Linux PPC would do nicely, I'd imagine. Or you could just piece together a $200 PC (it needn't have a monitor) and stick it there on the network. Wouldn't take more than an afternoon. LDAP is all XML based, so you can edit everything by hand and view the results in Mozilla. Easy.
By the way, this marks my 1000th post here on Slashdot (not counting those posted as Anonymous Coward). Quick word of thanks to everyone who makes this possible, and by that I mean the users, the people who post and moderate comments. Slashdot has become an icon (no pun intended) on the Internet, and a beacon in the Linux and Open Source communities. So, if you're reading this right now, pat yourself on the back for a job well done. Let's make the next 1000 posts as great as the first 1000.
South America is very close to Antarctica. So yes, most indigenous South Poleans would indeed be considered South Americans, ethnically, if not geographically.
As for wires melting the ice, I think you're neglecting waste heat. In elementary school, you might have done the experiment where you lay a string, weighted on both ends, across a block of ice, and observe as it works its way through the ice. A wire would do the same thing, but faster, thanks to what little energy leaked through the heat shielding.