Would it not be easy to have an unheated compartment insulated from the ISS, with 5 sides exposed to open space and in a shadow? I'm sure it would get cold enough (by heat radiation), and it would probably be useful to have a freezer to keep food/experiments fresh.
Great, software that will make people more close minded, less informed, and just generally less intelligent. Oh wait, did you say it came from Microsoft?
What do I have to hide? This premise has been debunked so many times it's not even funny any more. Anyway, the first thing that comes to mind is: imagine you are a witness to some major corruption in the ruling political administration (eg. watergate), are you sure you want the "powers that be" listening in on your conversation with your lawyer?
Now theres a point to be made. I wonder how many highschool teachers would actually use this to teach ID, versus how many would use this "freedom" to teach valid and important topics normally suppressed by the very same religious nutjobs?
If I told you Paul Bunyan's Ox stomped out the Great Lakes, how could you prove it wrong? Easy, All evidence indicates that the lakes were formed by melting glaciers over a few million years, not the hoof of a giant ox.
There are entire libraries of natural observations that could have, or could not have conformed to what would be expected with natural selection. For instance, the sudden appearance of a complex organ would be contrary to evolution's predictions - but every time people look, they eventually find intermediate forms.
Evolution often promotes rampent speculation, but it does indeed provide critically testable hypotheses.
As mentioned before, this potentially allows access to mounted encrypted disks, passwords in memory, and bypasses physical locks on machines and bios passwords.
Armed with this on a PDA like device I could walk through a room of computers and discretely compromise one after another -provided they have firewire ports, which are probably rare in public and corporate computers.
In the grandparent's case, it makes programmers, as a profession, more productive. Why should every programing team in each big company write their own http server, OS, database backend?? Without FLOSS, there would either be much more duplication of work, or companies would be spending more money on inflexible, commercial solutions and less on staff. Either way, less work gets done.
Floss makes shrinkwrap-software companies like Microsoft [slightly] less profitable, but benefit R&D in every other industry on earth.
Science explains *how* things work. Social policy dictates how things *should* work -you are confusing the two. Humans have an innate ability for murder, but our societies are stronger when we discourage it -so we write laws and innact social taboos to strengthen the group.
note: the ability to work in a group (socialization) is a trait of humans and therefore subject to natural selection.
Less copyright privileges for binary software really makes sense. Considering that copyright is an agreement between the people and the producer -with the understanding that it will eventually fall under the public domain, binary software is almost useless after only a few decades. Sourcecode will, however, always be valuable for research and historical purposes.
I'm sorry, you want to use your toaster in the bathtub? You have to purchase extra permissions to do that: $50 at amazon.com.
Remember, breaking usage agreements is STEALING. You wouldn't steal an old ladies purse, would you?
Any unauthorized appliance usage, or sharing of appliances is deemed a criminal offense and will be instantly reported directly to Microsoft.com. Your house will enter a "restricted usage" mode, and will drop to below freezing until sufficient licenses are purchased.
If only we could make a machine... no, many machines, thousands of machines -with the sole purpose of *copying* information and moving it around! Then we would have something! Nothing could stop the dissemination if knowledge and culture then!
Ever wondered why the "beautiful" horse nebula is not colour consistant from image to image? Many of those striking images of space are "transformed" into a colour space for aesthetic and pedagogical purposes. There's nothing stopping them from transforming the information collected in any medium into something interesting to look at.
First - you probably shouldn't reference a lay encyclopedia for a concise definition of a scientific theory -at least take a look at an undergrad textbook. You will commonly find the contemporary, biological theory of evolution -not darwin's conceptualization, and nothing to do with the big bang.
Macro and microevolution have not been debated in scientific circles for about a hundred years. Here's why: we can observe microevolution. From what we understand about the genetics and biology, we see no reason it cannot be extended over a large period of time. We have plenty of evidence for long term evolution in the fossil record and in living organisms (see: evolution of the eye). Lastly (and here's the clincher), there is NO DATA indicating that macroevolution does NOT occur (see: Parsimony/Oakman's razor).
I believe you proved my point - that muddying the term "evolution" to mean something more vague than the modern conceptualization of the theory is done specifically by "religions idiot" (your term, not mine), to discredit the science without actually providing counter-evidence. If you are interested in critiquing the theory, I would suggest you pick up a good resource on the topic. Though, you may find it frustrating to sift through the libraries of solid evidence.
Insightfull? Evolution is a well refined scientific theory, and it is articulated well enough in the literature to be critically tested.
The word evolution -when referring to the Theory of Evolution- is extremely specific. While deniers try to muddy the water, in scientific circles, it's definition is anything but vague.
If you question theory, good for you, but you better have data. If you deny evolution, you probably don't care about data, or about the scientific process at all.
You have a choice, poor signal-to-noise ratio, or no signal: just some jerkoff "telling" you what the signal should be.
I'm sure there is just as much slush thrown at the public by greedy corporations, and the "Liberal" media, as done by any pimple faced teen on digg.com. (btw, Fox News counts as the first category)
You never have mod points when you need them... The whole idea of single, solitary, sparks of innovation is a relic of the romantic period. Until "innovation" and "creativity" is realized for what it is: incremental improvements upon *other people's* work, we will continue to be afflicted with overzealous copyright laws giving limitless control over ideas to a single monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
If it was always on it's knees, it wouldn't have knees to fall on!
Remember that you need a Mac to creatively check email, creatively check websites, and creatively watch DVDs on planes. [stuff white people like]
Would it not be easy to have an unheated compartment insulated from the ISS, with 5 sides exposed to open space and in a shadow? I'm sure it would get cold enough (by heat radiation), and it would probably be useful to have a freezer to keep food/experiments fresh.
Great, software that will make people more close minded, less informed, and just generally less intelligent. Oh wait, did you say it came from Microsoft?
I have a ten story library here on campus for you to store and index in your head.
Wet processing is excellent for some restricted purposes, wet storage just plain sucks.
Now theres a point to be made. I wonder how many highschool teachers would actually use this to teach ID, versus how many would use this "freedom" to teach valid and important topics normally suppressed by the very same religious nutjobs?
There are entire libraries of natural observations that could have, or could not have conformed to what would be expected with natural selection. For instance, the sudden appearance of a complex organ would be contrary to evolution's predictions - but every time people look, they eventually find intermediate forms.
Evolution often promotes rampent speculation, but it does indeed provide critically testable hypotheses.
As mentioned before, this potentially allows access to mounted encrypted disks, passwords in memory, and bypasses physical locks on machines and bios passwords.
Armed with this on a PDA like device I could walk through a room of computers and discretely compromise one after another -provided they have firewire ports, which are probably rare in public and corporate computers.
The terms say you can't do illegal things. The terms don't say that they reserve the right to snoop in on your communications.
The terms are there to protect the ISP from lawsuit when the client gets sued by a copyright holder - it's not a mandate to become the police.
I wonder how well this scales. If the boat is required to "bob" with the waves, I doubt it would be a very usefull mechanism for larger craft.
In the grandparent's case, it makes programmers, as a profession, more productive. Why should every programing team in each big company write their own http server, OS, database backend?? Without FLOSS, there would either be much more duplication of work, or companies would be spending more money on inflexible, commercial solutions and less on staff. Either way, less work gets done.
Floss makes shrinkwrap-software companies like Microsoft [slightly] less profitable, but benefit R&D in every other industry on earth.
Science explains *how* things work. Social policy dictates how things *should* work -you are confusing the two. Humans have an innate ability for murder, but our societies are stronger when we discourage it -so we write laws and innact social taboos to strengthen the group.
note: the ability to work in a group (socialization) is a trait of humans and therefore subject to natural selection.
Less copyright privileges for binary software really makes sense. Considering that copyright is an agreement between the people and the producer -with the understanding that it will eventually fall under the public domain, binary software is almost useless after only a few decades. Sourcecode will, however, always be valuable for research and historical purposes.
I'm sorry, you want to use your toaster in the bathtub? You have to purchase extra permissions to do that: $50 at amazon.com.
Remember, breaking usage agreements is STEALING. You wouldn't steal an old ladies purse, would you?
Any unauthorized appliance usage, or sharing of appliances is deemed a criminal offense and will be instantly reported directly to Microsoft.com. Your house will enter a "restricted usage" mode, and will drop to below freezing until sufficient licenses are purchased.
If only we could make a machine... no, many machines, thousands of machines -with the sole purpose of *copying* information and moving it around! Then we would have something! Nothing could stop the dissemination if knowledge and culture then!
They are "giving away" ebooks just as much as slashdot is "giving away" all these fancy html documents.
Ever wondered why the "beautiful" horse nebula is not colour consistant from image to image? Many of those striking images of space are "transformed" into a colour space for aesthetic and pedagogical purposes. There's nothing stopping them from transforming the information collected in any medium into something interesting to look at.
First - you probably shouldn't reference a lay encyclopedia for a concise definition of a scientific theory -at least take a look at an undergrad textbook. You will commonly find the contemporary, biological theory of evolution -not darwin's conceptualization, and nothing to do with the big bang.
Macro and microevolution have not been debated in scientific circles for about a hundred years. Here's why: we can observe microevolution. From what we understand about the genetics and biology, we see no reason it cannot be extended over a large period of time. We have plenty of evidence for long term evolution in the fossil record and in living organisms (see: evolution of the eye). Lastly (and here's the clincher), there is NO DATA indicating that macroevolution does NOT occur (see: Parsimony/Oakman's razor).
I believe you proved my point - that muddying the term "evolution" to mean something more vague than the modern conceptualization of the theory is done specifically by "religions idiot" (your term, not mine), to discredit the science without actually providing counter-evidence. If you are interested in critiquing the theory, I would suggest you pick up a good resource on the topic. Though, you may find it frustrating to sift through the libraries of solid evidence.
Insightfull? Evolution is a well refined scientific theory, and it is articulated well enough in the literature to be critically tested.
The word evolution -when referring to the Theory of Evolution- is extremely specific. While deniers try to muddy the water, in scientific circles, it's definition is anything but vague.
If you question theory, good for you, but you better have data. If you deny evolution, you probably don't care about data, or about the scientific process at all.
You have a choice, poor signal-to-noise ratio, or no signal: just some jerkoff "telling" you what the signal should be.
I'm sure there is just as much slush thrown at the public by greedy corporations, and the "Liberal" media, as done by any pimple faced teen on digg.com. (btw, Fox News counts as the first category)
You never have mod points when you need them... The whole idea of single, solitary, sparks of innovation is a relic of the romantic period. Until "innovation" and "creativity" is realized for what it is: incremental improvements upon *other people's* work, we will continue to be afflicted with overzealous copyright laws giving limitless control over ideas to a single monopoly.
A pirate is still dependent on foreign innovation. A growing industry with open/free tools is able localize, make their own... etc.