I know this personally from professionals in the field, but here is a quote:
To provide lab data about which sealants and tapes last, and which are likely to fail, research was conducted at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Environmental Energy Technologies Division. Their major conclusion was that one should not use duct tape to seal ducts (specialty tapes are available for this purpose). (They defined duct tape as any fabric-based tape with rubber adhesive.) The testing done shows that under challenging but realistic conditions, duct tapes become brittle and may fail.[6] Commonly duct tape carries no safety certifications such as UL or Proposition 65, which means the tape may burn violently, producing toxic smoke; it may cause ingestion and contact toxicity; it can have irregular mechanical strength; and its adhesive may have low life expectancy. Its use in ducts has been prohibited by the state of California[7] and by building codes in most other places in the U.S. However, metalized and aluminum tapes used by professionals are still often called "duck/duct tapes".
This is news. However, Buckyballs is certainly giving Zen Magnets lots of free advertising by making it newsworthy. I can only assume after watching the video that the people making their PR decisions are just that dense.
Is it possible to sue someone for this kind of abuse? I know that if Zen Magnets were infringing and filed a counter notice that Zen Magnets could be sued. What about this situation? Is there any legal remedy for abusing DCMA? Is the DCMA silent on this kind of thing?
I could have any number of years of real world quantum computing experience. Unfortunately, there is no way to determine how many before you hire me. I can, however, provide you with some probabilities.
If NASA starts looking at alternatives, I'd be interested in what they say about Launch loops. They always looked cool to me. Maybe one day NASA will look at those also?
Well, I appreciate your polite reply. It is rather pleasant to have a conversation about such things without getting into a flame war. Whichever way we slice and dice it up, at some point it does come down to what you believe. Clearly, you and I disagree on Jesus.
It is unfortunate that this conversation was started by someone essentially claiming that atheist don't think:/ That's quite an unfair (and ironically thoughtless) prejudice. If you have already set the matter to rest and have concluded that there is nothing supernatural about the change in people's lives that Jesus makes, then I sincerely hope that you will see a life changed that challenges you to reconsider.
We could go round and round about evidence. However, I am not a scholar. I am not an archeologist. I am not a linguist or some other specialist of the sort. But I am a human and I have seen lives changed.
Well, the Bible does talk about Jesus changing people lives. You can still find that around today. Now, you might say that some natural psychological phenomenon is at work instead. Or you might point to a bunch of hypocrites or at the long list of personal failures by Christians and turn a blind eye to the change that does take place. Or perhaps you'll point to someone whose life changed without God by your measure. But, you asked for "some evidence". I point to that as some evidence - at least enough to warrant a thorough looking.
Here is one of my favorite programs. It is a radio drama of true life stories of people whose lives have been changed by Jesus. I personally know at least one person who had their story told by this radio drama team, so I can vouch that this isn't just made up. Or you can just investigate the stories yourself.
You are oversensitive on the subject. GP was ridiculing those who believe the earth is 6000 years old, not all religious people.
I apologize if that's the way I came across. My comment wasn't directed towards the GP. Personally, I didn't even feel as though he was ridiculing those who believe the earth is 6000 years old, but chiding a subset of them. My comment was directed to those who would reply to his comment with harsh words that would only serve to alienate some people who could have otherwise been reasoned with.
Hello. I am a Bible believing slashdotter. My college degree is in theoretical physics at a state university. My beliefs have never caused a serious permanent conflict with my education. Many people here would tell me that it should. They bash and mock young-earthers or any number of beliefs which *they* see as irreconcilable with science. Just a couple of things I want to point out:
1) Many *many* scientific advances have been made by deeply religious men and funded by a church. This is true historically and into our modern era. If you want a citation, use google.
2) Yes, there are religious people who do not understand science and say things that make us science folk cringe. That is not an excuse to bash religion or faith. That will not endear you to anyone or further scientific education. Remember there are also loony unscientific atheists, agnostics, as well as people of any other philosophical or religious persuasion. Pseudo-science is *not* the exclusive domain of the religious.
Do you want the general public to treat scientist and nerds the way some of you treat religious people? "Hey, a scientist sold me these brilliant pebbles. It turns out it's a crock - all scientist must be idiots! After all, this guy claiming to be a scientist is." We could all list countless failures by honest and dishonest men of science. Would you like the general public to lump you all together with ridicule and discard any science that has ever been touched or used by one of these men? They would throw out all of science! I am asking for you to be kind and understanding. It is possible to point out weaknesses in someone's theory without scorn and ridicule and without trying to trash their beliefs because of it. That will only alienate most people.
Defending an idea with bad science does not make the idea wrong - only the defense.
Fun sentiment, but not true. For years critics ridiculed the book of Daniel for having someone name Belshazzar as king of Babylon. Ultimately, archeology supported the Bible. We could probably get into a long drawn out tit for tat about different things, but I am uninterested in that. I only wanted to point out that your claim about "every" time is nothing but wishful hyperbole. Perhaps, you only meant it that way, and not as literal truth - in that case I apologize. Let's not get into a flame war over it:)
...makes it far more readable. I don't know what everyone's grievance is about this practice. I say, if it is *such* a problem, allow posters to post without a title and just show the first few words as the title until the comment is expanded.
This is a *discussion* board after all. I don't preface every thought I have with a title when discussing things in real life, why should I here?
I would wholeheartedly agree with you if the was pre-release information or even close to launch. However there are several things you should consider:
1) The Wii has been out for 4 years this November. Four years. In that time, no reputable person has disputed this widely reported "factoid". Do you think the developers don't know how much RAM they have to work with? With all of the thousands of people who work on this, no one, has disseminated convincing proof of more RAM. Not even a press release or nasty-gram from Nintendo?
2) Wii has a healthy homebrew community. These guys aren't script kiddies. They are real hardware engineers. Do you think they might alert their fans when/if they discovered that there was really more RAM?
Anyways, the only reason I even think about this to begin with is that my friend programs game for the Wii! He was the one who told me about it, I just linked to Wikipedia as a courtesy. So, I don't need any proof beyond that.
The solution is obvious. I am selling gravity credits to absolve you of your moon-doom guilt. Each credit you purchase represents energy gathered from sources not directly linked to the moon's potential energy plus some of the profits will be used to fund missions that will increase the moon's potential energy. This gravity offset program will save the earth for our posterity. As the administrator of this program, I will, of course, take a percentage of the sales as compensation. My motives are, however, purely in the interest of the future.
Meat can be broadly classified as "red" or "white" depending on the concentration of myoglobin in muscle fibre. When myoglobin is exposed to oxygen, reddish oxymyoglobin develops, making myoglobin-rich meat appear red. The redness of meat depends on species, animal age, and fibre type: Red meat contains more narrow muscle fibres that tend to operate over long periods without rest, while white meat contains more broad fibres that tend to work in short fast bursts.
it is apparent that killing each other is simply not productive. Well, this is apparent to me anyway.
The inventors of the following all thought their inventions would end war:
Smokeless gun powder
Airplane
Atomic Bomb
But those are *military* weapons..of course they won't end war...consider also:
The Television
It makes the list. If we could only learn about other cultures, we wouldn't want to go to war.
Mankind seems to have a penchant for turning every invention into a way to wage more efficient war. What if someone invented a cheap way to feed everybody? Well, congratulations, you've also invented a cheap way to feed armies. They can now fight war better.
Perhaps the alien will be like us, in this way.
Technology and philosophy seem to have a less than perfect track record for enlightening us...
Who wishes they could time travel to kill babies? Certainly not "everybody". The people I run with would want to try to change Hitler before he became a monster. Maybe even get him into art school...etc etc
I personally know a man who has run a private school for 40+ years. Where he lives, there used to be a voucher program. Many private schools went through the hoops to restructure to qualify. In then end, the schools that accepted the vouchers had to close.
Why? Well, eventually the voucher program was brought to court. The schools had grown dependent on the voucher program. The families had grown dependent. When the money was gone, they all had to shut down. Except for the schools which had avoided the voucher program.
Slashdot Mirror
To provide lab data about which sealants and tapes last, and which are likely to fail, research was conducted at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Environmental Energy Technologies Division. Their major conclusion was that one should not use duct tape to seal ducts (specialty tapes are available for this purpose). (They defined duct tape as any fabric-based tape with rubber adhesive.) The testing done shows that under challenging but realistic conditions, duct tapes become brittle and may fail.[6] Commonly duct tape carries no safety certifications such as UL or Proposition 65, which means the tape may burn violently, producing toxic smoke; it may cause ingestion and contact toxicity; it can have irregular mechanical strength; and its adhesive may have low life expectancy. Its use in ducts has been prohibited by the state of California[7] and by building codes in most other places in the U.S. However, metalized and aluminum tapes used by professionals are still often called "duck/duct tapes".
from Wikipedia
This is news. However, Buckyballs is certainly giving Zen Magnets lots of free advertising by making it newsworthy. I can only assume after watching the video that the people making their PR decisions are just that dense.
Is it possible to sue someone for this kind of abuse? I know that if Zen Magnets were infringing and filed a counter notice that Zen Magnets could be sued. What about this situation? Is there any legal remedy for abusing DCMA? Is the DCMA silent on this kind of thing?
I could have any number of years of real world quantum computing experience. Unfortunately, there is no way to determine how many before you hire me. I can, however, provide you with some probabilities.
If NASA starts looking at alternatives, I'd be interested in what they say about Launch loops. They always looked cool to me. Maybe one day NASA will look at those also?
Well, I appreciate your polite reply. It is rather pleasant to have a conversation about such things without getting into a flame war. Whichever way we slice and dice it up, at some point it does come down to what you believe. Clearly, you and I disagree on Jesus.
:/ That's quite an unfair (and ironically thoughtless) prejudice. If you have already set the matter to rest and have concluded that there is nothing supernatural about the change in people's lives that Jesus makes, then I sincerely hope that you will see a life changed that challenges you to reconsider.
It is unfortunate that this conversation was started by someone essentially claiming that atheist don't think
We could go round and round about evidence. However, I am not a scholar. I am not an archeologist. I am not a linguist or some other specialist of the sort. But I am a human and I have seen lives changed.
Well, the Bible does talk about Jesus changing people lives. You can still find that around today. Now, you might say that some natural psychological phenomenon is at work instead. Or you might point to a bunch of hypocrites or at the long list of personal failures by Christians and turn a blind eye to the change that does take place. Or perhaps you'll point to someone whose life changed without God by your measure. But, you asked for "some evidence". I point to that as some evidence - at least enough to warrant a thorough looking.
Here is one of my favorite programs. It is a radio drama of true life stories of people whose lives have been changed by Jesus. I personally know at least one person who had their story told by this radio drama team, so I can vouch that this isn't just made up. Or you can just investigate the stories yourself.
unshackled archive
mismod
You are oversensitive on the subject. GP was ridiculing those who believe the earth is 6000 years old, not all religious people.
I apologize if that's the way I came across. My comment wasn't directed towards the GP. Personally, I didn't even feel as though he was ridiculing those who believe the earth is 6000 years old, but chiding a subset of them. My comment was directed to those who would reply to his comment with harsh words that would only serve to alienate some people who could have otherwise been reasoned with.
It always had a weighty emotional impact with me. Kinda like watching people die on 9/11.
Just sayin, the Hindenburg was an awful disaster. Have you ever listened to that broadcast?
Hello. I am a Bible believing slashdotter. My college degree is in theoretical physics at a state university. My beliefs have never caused a serious permanent conflict with my education. Many people here would tell me that it should. They bash and mock young-earthers or any number of beliefs which *they* see as irreconcilable with science. Just a couple of things I want to point out:
1) Many *many* scientific advances have been made by deeply religious men and funded by a church. This is true historically and into our modern era. If you want a citation, use google.
2) Yes, there are religious people who do not understand science and say things that make us science folk cringe. That is not an excuse to bash religion or faith. That will not endear you to anyone or further scientific education. Remember there are also loony unscientific atheists, agnostics, as well as people of any other philosophical or religious persuasion. Pseudo-science is *not* the exclusive domain of the religious.
Do you want the general public to treat scientist and nerds the way some of you treat religious people? "Hey, a scientist sold me these brilliant pebbles. It turns out it's a crock - all scientist must be idiots! After all, this guy claiming to be a scientist is." We could all list countless failures by honest and dishonest men of science. Would you like the general public to lump you all together with ridicule and discard any science that has ever been touched or used by one of these men? They would throw out all of science! I am asking for you to be kind and understanding. It is possible to point out weaknesses in someone's theory without scorn and ridicule and without trying to trash their beliefs because of it. That will only alienate most people.
Defending an idea with bad science does not make the idea wrong - only the defense.
Fun sentiment, but not true. For years critics ridiculed the book of Daniel for having someone name Belshazzar as king of Babylon. Ultimately, archeology supported the Bible. We could probably get into a long drawn out tit for tat about different things, but I am uninterested in that. I only wanted to point out that your claim about "every" time is nothing but wishful hyperbole. Perhaps, you only meant it that way, and not as literal truth - in that case I apologize. Let's not get into a flame war over it :)
how are the samples collected? could you submit another person's DNA and snoop/harass them?
you know, like the background image debacle or buzz
mice aren't multitouch
http://www.apple.com/magicmouse/
Just sayin...
...makes it far more readable. I don't know what everyone's grievance is about this practice. I say, if it is *such* a problem, allow posters to post without a title and just show the first few words as the title until the comment is expanded.
This is a *discussion* board after all. I don't preface every thought I have with a title when discussing things in real life, why should I here?
I would wholeheartedly agree with you if the was pre-release information or even close to launch. However there are several things you should consider:
1) The Wii has been out for 4 years this November. Four years. In that time, no reputable person has disputed this widely reported "factoid". Do you think the developers don't know how much RAM they have to work with? With all of the thousands of people who work on this, no one, has disseminated convincing proof of more RAM. Not even a press release or nasty-gram from Nintendo?
2) Wii has a healthy homebrew community. These guys aren't script kiddies. They are real hardware engineers. Do you think they might alert their fans when/if they discovered that there was really more RAM?
Anyways, the only reason I even think about this to begin with is that my friend programs game for the Wii! He was the one who told me about it, I just linked to Wikipedia as a courtesy. So, I don't need any proof beyond that.
I only own a Wii, but it has several shortcomings. Some are forgivable, some are understandable, but one is not.
Ram. It has 92MB of RAM - total. This is a hugely unnecessary burden on developers.
That's the biggest complaint I have heard from people who actually make games on the thing.
After that, I would say, their online strategy needs the most work. Followed closely by needing to integrate "motion plus" into their controllers.
The solution is obvious. I am selling gravity credits to absolve you of your moon-doom guilt. Each credit you purchase represents energy gathered from sources not directly linked to the moon's potential energy plus some of the profits will be used to fund missions that will increase the moon's potential energy. This gravity offset program will save the earth for our posterity. As the administrator of this program, I will, of course, take a percentage of the sales as compensation. My motives are, however, purely in the interest of the future.
posting to undo...
red meat is red because it still has blood in it (while white meat is white because the blood has been drained)
From Wikipedia:
Meat can be broadly classified as "red" or "white" depending on the concentration of myoglobin in muscle fibre. When myoglobin is exposed to oxygen, reddish oxymyoglobin develops, making myoglobin-rich meat appear red. The redness of meat depends on species, animal age, and fibre type: Red meat contains more narrow muscle fibres that tend to operate over long periods without rest, while white meat contains more broad fibres that tend to work in short fast bursts.
it is apparent that killing each other is simply not productive. Well, this is apparent to me anyway.
The inventors of the following all thought their inventions would end war:
Smokeless gun powder
Airplane
Atomic Bomb
But those are *military* weapons..of course they won't end war...consider also:
The Television
It makes the list. If we could only learn about other cultures, we wouldn't want to go to war. Mankind seems to have a penchant for turning every invention into a way to wage more efficient war. What if someone invented a cheap way to feed everybody? Well, congratulations, you've also invented a cheap way to feed armies. They can now fight war better.
Perhaps the alien will be like us, in this way.
Technology and philosophy seem to have a less than perfect track record for enlightening us...
Who wishes they could time travel to kill babies? Certainly not "everybody". The people I run with would want to try to change Hitler before he became a monster. Maybe even get him into art school...etc etc
I personally know a man who has run a private school for 40+ years. Where he lives, there used to be a voucher program. Many private schools went through the hoops to restructure to qualify. In then end, the schools that accepted the vouchers had to close.
Why? Well, eventually the voucher program was brought to court. The schools had grown dependent on the voucher program. The families had grown dependent. When the money was gone, they all had to shut down. Except for the schools which had avoided the voucher program.