Gosh, can you imagine that someone read the articles (and a lot of the original literature too), and still thinks it's a bad attempt to save a model that's not working? There are now three "non-classical" effects needed to hold up the Big Bang model; dark matter, dark energy, and rapid early inflation. And that is your rationale explanation?
The one thing the Big Bang model has going for it is explaining the observed cosmic microwave background. It fails on a number of other observed effects, galaxies should fly apart, and the universe should be shrinking, unless you allow for a total abandonment of matter and energy as we can observe and describe today.
Phlogiston was the leading explanation for a century, mainly because nobody could come up with a better idea. But the absence of a better idea doesn't make one theory right.
Dark matter is NOT an observation. It's an explanation for a couple of observed effects (galactic rotation, gravitational lensing) based on the standard model, but since no one can see it, conveniently by definition, you can't call it an observation.
By the same token, people could call variations in gravity, mistaken distances or dark cold clouds shielding massive objects "observations".
The last time someone postulated invisible matter and negative energy it was called phlogiston. I'm wondering if today's cosmologists propagating their model with 96% "stuff we have no clue what it is" have read up on that subject.
In no other scientific field can you get away with a model based on so many fudge factors, and still get it taken seriously, or even published for that matter.
Actually these were special DHS laptops with the ultimate security feature: An ultraslick teflon outer coating to prevent the employees from writing down their automatically generated 16 letter+capital+number+special changing once a month passwords on sticky notes and glue them to the notebook.
In addition, all space hardware usually needs to be radiation hardened. And while flash drives have shown to be astonishingly insensitive to mechanical damage, I have no idea who sensitive they are to radiation damage.
Naturally this isn't something practical:).
But, in our hypothetical case, if the farm belongs to your dad, and you're not paid, you can legally fly under the radar.
Re:Surveillance isn't really an impediment on free
on
CCTVs Don't Work in the UK
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
But it's not mandatory that you get a driver's license, or voters registration. If you want to live on a farm with no contact to the outer world, you're free to do so. I don't even think you are legally required to have to have a SSN. Not so in most European countries, it's a misdemeanor to not be registered.
Re:Surveillance isn't really an impediment on free
on
CCTVs Don't Work in the UK
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That depends on your definition of freedom. Americans are really big on the right to privacy, so being recorded as soon as you step outside your house is a huge loss of freedom for us.
Europeans are more used to government control, with mandatory registration of your residence and mandatory IDs.
I agree, the only time I play single-player games is on travel, when I don't have a connection. This "feature" singlehandedly defeats my whole motivation to buy.
I'm aware that you can get around this issue, I was just trying to point out that the raw "possible IO" number is not all it's cracked up to be.
Similar for using it as a specialty device for read heavy applications; it was the general "ideal server device" that I had a problem with. When I first read about SSD it sounded like the second coming of sliced bread, it was the "devil in the detail" that soured me, especially the write limitations that seem to be a physical limitation, not something you can engineer away.
Well, they would be if they had unlimited read-write cycles. But flash is rather more limited in that regard, some estimates are as low as 100,000 cycles. If your 2500 IOs/s hit the same sector, your server SSD is fried in 7 min. SSD are distinctively NOT server suitable if you have a lot of write cycles (probably less of an issue if it's just answering read requests).
Harming competitors in not necessarily harming consumers, remember VHS vs. Betamax? We had $1000 VCRs until one format killed the other (clearly harming its competitors). But VHS machines dropped to $30 after it became a monopoly format, because other competitors were able to invest now that the format war was over.
The point the judges make is: If JEDEC would have known about the patents and intended patents, they would probably just have enforced RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory)licensing terms. This would still made Rambus the monopolist, just at a lower rate. So the deceit did not give Rambus the monopoly, it just gave it better licensing rates.
But the judges also doubt that the evidence holds up to the light in regards to the deceitfulness the FTC found. It doesn't say in the JEDEC rules of conduct that you have to tell everyone about everything you plan to patent in the future, only that you have to list existing and pending patents (which can be found by a 15 min search on the USPTO website anyway). Rambus "crime" was that they knew they had the ability to patent the technology JEDEC was discussing, and were not disclosing it; something against the spirit, but not the letter of the code for standard setting organizations.
There is one grain of truth in it; while you're able to ask for any amount of money, you are in fact limited by two factors:
- you can only sell one of each item to any one customer, since the customer can freely copy it
- your fee is capped by how much money it costs to have a competent guy take your source code and get it running on the customers system without giving you a penny
So it's very hard for you to make any "real" (Bill Gates type) money with GPL compared to lets say a proprietary CAD program that can charge $1000/seat/year.
While the 9th circuit gets frequently overturned, it's usually for it's "liberal" leaning. Since this case supported the federal prosecutor, and mainly decided that there was no constitutional case to begin with, I doubt the case has much to fear from the current supreme court, even if it accepts it for review.
Right, because the NSF's bureaucracy is so much better, plus all of NSF university based reviewers are great of awarding funding to industry based research.
Having worked with funding from both institutions in both private and academic settings, I can't think of a worse idea.
Cosmic radiation is THE single biggest issue. The Apollo astronauts took a calculated risk. The high energy particles from a certain type of solar flare can kill an unprotected human in 30 min. Doesn't happen that often, but if it does, you're toast.
Ok, so lets protect them you say. Easier said than done, you need some 10 ft of soil above you to protect you. Or maybe 6 ft of lead crystal; so with a bit of engraving you'd get one hell of decorative dome.
The reason there might be water on the poles is that you have permanently shaded craters at -220 C. And you're basically proposing to warm those up to make all the water go away?
Also, the moon basically is permafrost, once you get below a couple of feet of dust you're at a balmy -20 C constant temperature. So you'll need to put warm booties on your plants.
Well, you're correct that during the interview your college will matter little. But the question is, will you give the interview to the guy from the LA college if you have a stack of 50 resumes with 10 MIT, Caltech or similar pedigree schools.
The only advantage of a big name school is it makes you stand out from the masses, so you get into the door easier.
I agree, the whole reason why we started getting the disconnect of bus speed and CPU speed was interconnect lengths and travel time of the signal. At gigahertz speed your signal just can't make it from your cpu to the hard drive.
Slashdot Mirror
Gosh, can you imagine that someone read the articles (and a lot of the original literature too), and still thinks it's a bad attempt to save a model that's not working? There are now three "non-classical" effects needed to hold up the Big Bang model; dark matter, dark energy, and rapid early inflation. And that is your rationale explanation?
The one thing the Big Bang model has going for it is explaining the observed cosmic microwave background. It fails on a number of other observed effects, galaxies should fly apart, and the universe should be shrinking, unless you allow for a total abandonment of matter and energy as we can observe and describe today.
Phlogiston was the leading explanation for a century, mainly because nobody could come up with a better idea. But the absence of a better idea doesn't make one theory right.
Dark matter is NOT an observation. It's an explanation for a couple of observed effects (galactic rotation, gravitational lensing) based on the standard model, but since no one can see it, conveniently by definition, you can't call it an observation.
By the same token, people could call variations in gravity, mistaken distances or dark cold clouds shielding massive objects "observations".
The last time someone postulated invisible matter and negative energy it was called phlogiston. I'm wondering if today's cosmologists propagating their model with 96% "stuff we have no clue what it is" have read up on that subject.
In no other scientific field can you get away with a model based on so many fudge factors, and still get it taken seriously, or even published for that matter.
at that lousy resolution they offer, that's a half centimeter pixel. I think you need to sit far far away to enjoy that diagonal.
Actually these were special DHS laptops with the ultimate security feature:
An ultraslick teflon outer coating to prevent the employees from writing down their automatically generated 16 letter+capital+number+special changing once a month passwords on sticky notes and glue them to the notebook.
In addition, all space hardware usually needs to be radiation hardened. And while flash drives have shown to be astonishingly insensitive to mechanical damage, I have no idea who sensitive they are to radiation damage.
Naturally this isn't something practical :).
But, in our hypothetical case, if the farm belongs to your dad, and you're not paid, you can legally fly under the radar.
But it's not mandatory that you get a driver's license, or voters registration. If you want to live on a farm with no contact to the outer world, you're free to do so. I don't even think you are legally required to have to have a SSN. Not so in most European countries, it's a misdemeanor to not be registered.
That depends on your definition of freedom.
Americans are really big on the right to privacy, so being recorded as soon as you step outside your house is a huge loss of freedom for us.
Europeans are more used to government control, with mandatory registration of your residence and mandatory IDs.
I agree, the only time I play single-player games is on travel, when I don't have a connection. This "feature" singlehandedly defeats my whole motivation to buy.
6 billion shades of grey, that's 32 bits just for one color. What are you using, 1024 bit color?
To put it in relation - some pidgin developer posted 12,000 downloads from sourceforge for their software.
Trillian has 35,000,000 downloads on CNET.
I'm aware that you can get around this issue, I was just trying to point out that the raw "possible IO" number is not all it's cracked up to be.
Similar for using it as a specialty device for read heavy applications; it was the general "ideal server device" that I had a problem with.
When I first read about SSD it sounded like the second coming of sliced bread, it was the "devil in the detail" that soured me, especially the write limitations that seem to be a physical limitation, not something you can engineer away.
Well, they would be if they had unlimited read-write cycles. But flash is rather more limited in that regard, some estimates are as low as 100,000 cycles.
If your 2500 IOs/s hit the same sector, your server SSD is fried in 7 min. SSD are distinctively NOT server suitable if you have a lot of write cycles (probably less of an issue if it's just answering read requests).
Well, we could just assume he doesn't live in an area under the control of the RIAA ...
Harming competitors in not necessarily harming consumers, remember VHS vs. Betamax? We had $1000 VCRs until one format killed the other (clearly harming its competitors). But VHS machines dropped to $30 after it became a monopoly format, because other competitors were able to invest now that the format war was over.
The point the judges make is: If JEDEC would have known about the patents and intended patents, they would probably just have enforced RAND (reasonable and non-discriminatory)licensing terms. This would still made Rambus the monopolist, just at a lower rate. So the deceit did not give Rambus the monopoly, it just gave it better licensing rates.
But the judges also doubt that the evidence holds up to the light in regards to the deceitfulness the FTC found. It doesn't say in the JEDEC rules of conduct that you have to tell everyone about everything you plan to patent in the future, only that you have to list existing and pending patents (which can be found by a 15 min search on the USPTO website anyway). Rambus "crime" was that they knew they had the ability to patent the technology JEDEC was discussing, and were not disclosing it; something against the spirit, but not the letter of the code for standard setting organizations.
There is one grain of truth in it; while you're able to ask for any amount of money, you are in fact limited by two factors:
- you can only sell one of each item to any one customer, since the customer can freely copy it
- your fee is capped by how much money it costs to have a competent guy take your source code and get it running on the customers system without giving you a penny
So it's very hard for you to make any "real" (Bill Gates type) money with GPL compared to lets say a proprietary CAD program that can charge $1000/seat/year.
While the 9th circuit gets frequently overturned, it's usually for it's "liberal" leaning. Since this case supported the federal prosecutor, and mainly decided that there was no constitutional case to begin with, I doubt the case has much to fear from the current supreme court, even if it accepts it for review.
Right, because the NSF's bureaucracy is so much better, plus all of NSF university based reviewers are great of awarding funding to industry based research.
Having worked with funding from both institutions in both private and academic settings, I can't think of a worse idea.
"Mr. President, Mr. President, the Russians painted the moon red"
"Where's the problem, just write Coca Cola on it"
Cosmic radiation is THE single biggest issue. The Apollo astronauts took a calculated risk. The high energy particles from a certain type of solar flare can kill an unprotected human in 30 min. Doesn't happen that often, but if it does, you're toast.
Ok, so lets protect them you say. Easier said than done, you need some 10 ft of soil above you to protect you. Or maybe 6 ft of lead crystal; so with a bit of engraving you'd get one hell of decorative dome.
The reason there might be water on the poles is that you have permanently shaded craters at -220 C. And you're basically proposing to warm those up to make all the water go away?
Also, the moon basically is permafrost, once you get below a couple of feet of dust you're at a balmy -20 C constant temperature. So you'll need to put warm booties on your plants.
Well, you're correct that during the interview your college will matter little. But the question is, will you give the interview to the guy from the LA college if you have a stack of 50 resumes with 10 MIT, Caltech or similar pedigree schools.
The only advantage of a big name school is it makes you stand out from the masses, so you get into the door easier.
I agree, the whole reason why we started getting the disconnect of bus speed and CPU speed was interconnect lengths and travel time of the signal. At gigahertz speed your signal just can't make it from your cpu to the hard drive.