> when their mortal intruments cannot prove the existence of a certain set of invisible species living on this planet
Well, since we can't see them, how the hell can anyone suggest "they" (whoever they are...) exist? And a more important question in my mind is, what the hell are you talking about?
> Life on Mars may not increase the likelihood of life being elsewhere in the Universe -- since life on both planets could have come from the same source (which is not necessarily Earth).
If the original "life"/microbes came from the same place and landed on both Earth & Mars, it seems likely that there was more of that "seeding material" floating through space & would eventually land on more planets. Perhaps Earth was the millionth planet to get this material and the first thousand planets have had life spring up and die out already, while still more will begin long after we're gone.
> Why is it that if the production rate of supernovae is one ever two years, that there aren't thousands or millions of supernovae in that cluster to be observed?
Ummm, IANAM(athemetician), but I would think that if something happens once every 500 days or so, and the supernova takes maybe a year (guess) to complete, that there would only 1-3 visible at any given (average) time.
Unless, after a supernova happened, you would be able to "see it" for a thousand years.
That brings up an interesting question that most people here probably know: How long does the whole process take? After it has collapsed and starts to explode, how long is it visible? And I don't mean "visible" in the night sky - I am talking about telescopes of course.
> But still, every 2 years is really exciting. We can literally watch a massive cluster of stars go boom in a human lifetime!
Sort of... One of the things that a lot of people don't remember (because I'm sure all of us know) is that the stuff we are seeing in that other galaxy is from millions (or more) of years ago (light takes time to travel, yadda yadda). So, is it possible that that many years ago that our own galaxy had a similar supernova rate? Or at least closer?
> How soon, who knows...but saying that it won't happen is like saying no one will ever need more then 640k of memory..
Considering the scale of this issue, it seems more like a homo erectus saying "No one need fire. Too hot and not portable, like Linux." Well, except for the Linux thing.
But seriously, I think the planet itself would be long gone before that many IP addresses was even close to being used. Until, of course, nanobots start self-replicating and join the Internet Continuum & start taking IPs (those dirty bastards).
> It will take big corporations and ISP's to finally say, You cant do business with us unless you move.
Don't think that's the way it works. Businesses want to make money. They don't see the eventual problems with IPv4, they don't see any other businesses (read: competitors) doing it, so why should they? Businesses will only remove access to IPv4 once there is at least 75% (shot in the dark figure) of their potential customers have already switched.
That, of course, does not apply to ISPs, who should have already considered IPv6, if not partially implemented it, as you suggested. So, IMO you are half-correct.
> people who get their news from anywhere but Slashdot know what's up with.NET but
Well, I get news from all over the place and have no idea what.NET is really supposed to be. The meaning of it has changed so much since it was first announced that I'm surprised anyone would know. But, of course, that's mostly because I don't care.
> because there is no way that a windows FUI would fool a non windows user
Oh, come on, man. There are PLENTY of Mac users out there stupid enough to see a Windows-like message box and think it really came from their Mac. I'll bet there's at least two Linux users the same way. At least the ones who use it because of company policy or some similar circumstance.
> buttons that say "More Info"...apparently they haven't done so yet.
This is probably due to a time limit within which the banners must be changed. They are probably not expected to change them all within two days of the settlement.
> already a precedent logged in the world's history that says the first company to try to use FUI in a bold way got a public embarassment
I agree with what you said on a theoretical basis, because, of course, you are correct. But I think most small businesses(*), especially those who need to trick the consumer to buy the product, would not look for any legal precedent, let alone settlements, when choosing an advertising method. To those who are not like us, it's just another way to advertise a product -- they don't think of who it will annoy. Well, perhaps they DO consider who it will annoy. "Any advertising is good advertising" is a common idea, and that includes bad press.
I'll point out that none of this makes it "right," just that history has a funny way of repeating itself sometimes.
(*) Really, I don't think most big businesses would use advertising like that anyway
> I guess your cunning retort defeats his entire argument.
I lose more faith in Slahdot every day... A Coward makes a stupid remark and the person pointing out AC's an idiot gets modded flamebait? I think the bait was the moron who felt the need to nitpick and insult.
You, sir, are my kind of poster (at least, at the moment you are).
> What happens if ALL the parachutes fail, something that is not impossible?
While that is a good point, I don't think they are too worried about the landing. Look at it this way: What if the heat tiles fell off of a NASA space shuttle? Oh, they did? Not everyone needs or expects 100% safety, especially when going into a new field.
> While honest may not be a hack, it is definitely a virtue of hackers
Honesty is a virtue for anyone, but I don't think hackers are more likely to be honest. That said, that does not include the ones that are too naive to know when lieing is necessary/preferrable.
> Those Estonians still need books, or should they learn English?
It would make things a lot easier if they would learn English. Otherwise, there is no room to complain -- either conform or live without the comforts of conformity. Not that I think everyone (anyone) should do everything they are told is "right..."
> get a bike with a DC motor, and you can keep your batteries topped up
Now that right there is probably the best solution. Especially if you put it together yourself (BTW, I'm not suggesting you build the motor from parts...) If you're gonna use electricity while "roughing it," you darn well better work for that energy:)
Slashdot Mirror
> when their mortal intruments cannot prove the existence of a certain set of invisible species living on this planet
Well, since we can't see them, how the hell can anyone suggest "they" (whoever they are...) exist? And a more important question in my mind is, what the hell are you talking about?
> More like stuck his foot in the water and looked at the horizon
Considering the size of the ocean, the two are about the same.
> Life on Mars may not increase the likelihood of life being elsewhere in the Universe -- since life on both planets could have come from the same source (which is not necessarily Earth).
If the original "life"/microbes came from the same place and landed on both Earth & Mars, it seems likely that there was more of that "seeding material" floating through space & would eventually land on more planets. Perhaps Earth was the millionth planet to get this material and the first thousand planets have had life spring up and die out already, while still more will begin long after we're gone.
> Why is it that if the production rate of supernovae is one ever two years, that there aren't thousands or millions of supernovae in that cluster to be observed?
Ummm, IANAM(athemetician), but I would think that if something happens once every 500 days or so, and the supernova takes maybe a year (guess) to complete, that there would only 1-3 visible at any given (average) time.
Unless, after a supernova happened, you would be able to "see it" for a thousand years.
That brings up an interesting question that most people here probably know: How long does the whole process take? After it has collapsed and starts to explode, how long is it visible? And I don't mean "visible" in the night sky - I am talking about telescopes of course.
> But still, every 2 years is really exciting. We can literally watch a massive cluster of stars go boom in a human lifetime!
Sort of... One of the things that a lot of people don't remember (because I'm sure all of us know) is that the stuff we are seeing in that other galaxy is from millions (or more) of years ago (light takes time to travel, yadda yadda). So, is it possible that that many years ago that our own galaxy had a similar supernova rate? Or at least closer?
Just a thought.
> Perhaps in the Future, when all these stars have gone supernova, it will be refered to as "The Maw Cluster"
Why? I don't get it.
> sign out in front of their headquarters proclaiming that they've gone an entire three days so far without printing an outright lie..
Sort of like those "_#_ Days of Safety in Our Workplace!"
They'd probably only need enough numbers for 1-10 or so.
> Remember the 30-some miners who got stuck in Pennsylvania
Umm, not that this takes anything away from your point, but it was 9 miners.
> How soon, who knows...but saying that it won't happen is like saying no one will ever need more then 640k of memory..
Considering the scale of this issue, it seems more like a homo erectus saying "No one need fire. Too hot and not portable, like Linux." Well, except for the Linux thing.
But seriously, I think the planet itself would be long gone before that many IP addresses was even close to being used. Until, of course, nanobots start self-replicating and join the Internet Continuum & start taking IPs (those dirty bastards).
> It will take big corporations and ISP's to finally say, You cant do business with us unless you move.
Don't think that's the way it works. Businesses want to make money. They don't see the eventual problems with IPv4, they don't see any other businesses (read: competitors) doing it, so why should they? Businesses will only remove access to IPv4 once there is at least 75% (shot in the dark figure) of their potential customers have already switched.
That, of course, does not apply to ISPs, who should have already considered IPv6, if not partially implemented it, as you suggested. So, IMO you are half-correct.
> people who get their news from anywhere but Slashdot know what's up with .NET but
.NET is really supposed to be. The meaning of it has changed so much since it was first announced that I'm surprised anyone would know. But, of course, that's mostly because I don't care.
Well, I get news from all over the place and have no idea what
> It's a shame they're going to stop using (snicker) "FUI"
Now that they can't use FUI, they'll have to resort to using EUI, Emulated User Interface. *Oh the whorer*.
> because there is no way that a windows FUI would fool a non windows user
Oh, come on, man. There are PLENTY of Mac users out there stupid enough to see a Windows-like message box and think it really came from their Mac. I'll bet there's at least two Linux users the same way. At least the ones who use it because of company policy or some similar circumstance.
> what the hell? [why] is everyone trolling my comments with that attack today?
Because they are losers and have nothing better to do than to attack those who are smarter than they are.
("who're" should be a valid contraction for "who are." It's more fun to type.)
> buttons that say "More Info"...apparently they haven't done so yet.
This is probably due to a time limit within which the banners must be changed. They are probably not expected to change them all within two days of the settlement.
> already a precedent logged in the world's history that says the first company to try to use FUI in a bold way got a public embarassment
I agree with what you said on a theoretical basis, because, of course, you are correct. But I think most small businesses(*), especially those who need to trick the consumer to buy the product, would not look for any legal precedent, let alone settlements, when choosing an advertising method. To those who are not like us, it's just another way to advertise a product -- they don't think of who it will annoy. Well, perhaps they DO consider who it will annoy. "Any advertising is good advertising" is a common idea, and that includes bad press.
I'll point out that none of this makes it "right," just that history has a funny way of repeating itself sometimes.
(*) Really, I don't think most big businesses would use advertising like that anyway
> I guess your cunning retort defeats his entire argument.
I lose more faith in Slahdot every day... A Coward makes a stupid remark and the person pointing out AC's an idiot gets modded flamebait? I think the bait was the moron who felt the need to nitpick and insult.
You, sir, are my kind of poster (at least, at the moment you are).
> What happens if ALL the parachutes fail, something that is not impossible?
While that is a good point, I don't think they are too worried about the landing. Look at it this way: What if the heat tiles fell off of a NASA space shuttle? Oh, they did? Not everyone needs or expects 100% safety, especially when going into a new field.
> My car doesn't have spark plugs, you insensitve clod!
Well, you better put them back!
> If you help me out I'll get all of my equipment from you
:)
Social interaction and sharing knowledge, the original B2B directory. I like seeing things like this
> While honest may not be a hack, it is definitely a virtue of hackers
Honesty is a virtue for anyone, but I don't think hackers are more likely to be honest. That said, that does not include the ones that are too naive to know when lieing is necessary/preferrable.
> Those Estonians still need books, or should they learn English?
It would make things a lot easier if they would learn English. Otherwise, there is no room to complain -- either conform or live without the comforts of conformity. Not that I think everyone (anyone) should do everything they are told is "right..."
> Armageddon after 7 years of world peace
Excellent! We can be sure the world lives forever, as long as the Palestinians & Isrealis live in the same area!
That is interesting to know, tho. From where is that derived?
> If you use a 64-bit time() function, you'll be okay for about 250 billion years or so.
Psshh, it's still a bug. OK, smart guy, what will you do on March 25, 252,453,984 at 10:05? HAHA, you don't have all the answers now, do you!
For the humor impaired, yes, that was a joke.
For the humor enabled, no, it wasn't funny.
> get a bike with a DC motor, and you can keep your batteries topped up
:)
Now that right there is probably the best solution. Especially if you put it together yourself (BTW, I'm not suggesting you build the motor from parts...) If you're gonna use electricity while "roughing it," you darn well better work for that energy