You get no karma bonus for being modded funny. Knowing this, some moderators choose to mod insightful/interesting instead of funny so people are rewarded for their humour.
So shouldn't the article be about how poor our prediction skills are rather than about how we cling to old tech? In the mainframes case, we cling to it because the concept was updated and still represents the most economically efficient solution to the problem.
The article may as well be asking "Why do personal automobiles keep kicking?". Because they work, and they solve they still solve the problems that they are meant to solve. And when a new problem crops up, (fuel prices/pollution) the solution isn't to get rid of the car, it is to redesign it to address the new concerns; just like IBM and other companies did with mainframes.
Looking at the pictures, it doesn't appear to be a sustained flight drone. I think what they have in mind here is more like hopping form rooftop to rooftop rather than actually flying behind the suspect. The article says "capable" of hovering; would you ride in an airplane that was described by the media as "cabable" of flying?
Ahh "everyone". Certainly nobody would be stupid enough to live these days without a broadband internet connection to their home. Nevermind that half of the population of the US still lives in what is considered "rural" areas.
I can tell you from experience, there remain little to no options for broadband outside population centers of 20,000 people or more. There are some satelite providers but they are very expensive ($100 for a 1 Mb connection). Not to mention a 40 gb un-upgradable hard drive isn't going to get you very far when you are downloading 10-20 gb games.
Google got exactly what they wanted here, a nationwide network that is forced to be available for thier android platform. They never really wanted the spectrum, if necissary they might have done it anyway but this would have been the prefered result.
It doesn't matter how much inflation has increased since the 1970's, the price of gold has also done so. It remains economically imposible to return to the gold standard, and it is also against the Internation Monetary Fund's policies which the US is a member of.
Inflation is an unfortunate side effect of the poor way we currently run our economy. Trying to adopt the gold standard to curb inflation will not solve the root causes any more than giving an AID's patient an infusion of T-cells will cure HIV.
Ok, once and for all... there is not enough gold mined in the entire world for this to work; even with the ridiculously high price of gold.
It is estimated that there has been 150000 tonnes of gold mined to date about 25% of which is held by other nations as resevse to their currency, most of the rest is held by private citizens as jewelry. Even assuming the total amount, 150000 is about 5.6 billion ounces. 5.6 billion ounces comes to 5.6 trillion USD. The GDP of the US is 13.8 trillion dollars.
If we even tried this plan, the value of gold would have to increase by atleast one, probably two orders of magnitude. The result on the global economy would be absolute chaos.
This is just my gut instinct speaking but... There will be atleast one, probably several international incidents at the Olympics.
Unless the Chinese government totally changes the way they do things, this is inevitable. There will be people taking advantage of the Olympics to do missionary work. There will be people taking advantage of the Olympics to publisize China's many indescretions.
How will the government respond? Are we going to have dozens of people arrested, imprisoned and/or deported? In a way, I almost hope we do, it would open the worlds eyes to just what is happens there, how restricted freedoms really are.
I agree with you that consensus is bad science; unfortunatly, most subjects in science have gone far beyond what I have the time, money, and intellegence to fully understand.
I don't have time to research global warming to the point that I understand all the nuances of the theory. Even if I did, I don't have the money for a computer to run the simulations myself. I am forced to accept the opinion of the poeple who do have the resources to do the research.
The problem is, the issues can then be clouded by politics, the media, or just plain crank science. This means that scientists are forced into vehemently defending their views since if the opposition (who they feel is wrong) gains even a toehold, we end up with evolution deniers and people who honestly believe video games are the direct cause of all violence in society.
This is their wimpy 16 part prototype. Eventually, they hope to control 1024 parts, allowing them to store 4^1024 bits of data with a single pulse... in a single molecule.
I remember the show "Breaking Vegas" had a guy who did exactly that. Press a certain sequence of keys and you are assured a win on the next play.
They have several safegaurds to prevent that kind of thing (especially now). I know that it is illegal for anyone involved in the developement/design/testing to enter a casino. I would imagine that they would have code reviews with a variety of people as well.
Also, that Breaking Vegas show was awesome. They did the big well known ones like the MIT team but also hit some that I had never heard of like the slot machine guy. Other highlights were the shoe computer to calculate the result of ruelette and analyzing the random number generator for keno to figure out the next game.
Your example is earily similar to something that happened to my Mother a few months ago. She works the books for a local grocery store a few times a week along with one other person. One day, almost 10k goes missing.
It was only by watching the video for 8 straight hours that they were able to prove that it was the other person. If it wasn't for the tape my mom probably would have been fired and blacklisted (small town, news travels fast).
Because murder is far too easy as it is. Someone determined enough that doesn't care about dying will always take out a few people first.
Allowing them to scout the territory before they make thier attempt will make it all the easier for them to target either large numbers of poeple or important people.
Look at the Oklahoma City bombing, two guys with a crapload of fertilizer and a uHual. How exactly are the gaurds soposed to stop a truck that rams it's way through the gates, drives up to the commanders mess and blows itself up; all in about 15 seconds.
The document can be copied if it is copied as a whole, but you cannot copy individual pictures/graphs out of it. They have the owner's permission for the first, but not for the second.
We don't need more knowlegable judges, we need more intelligent ones. Pulling out my geek card a little bit, this reminds me of the Bene Geserit in the Dune series. No formal system of laws, simply judges/jury that look at each individual case and rule as fairly as they can.
Of course, you were refering to their knowledge of technology, not of the law. The point is, our laws should be simple. Why do we need a law that says "don't steal over the internet" and another that says "don't mug people on the streets" and another that says "don't break into people's homes and steal"? There should just be one simple "don't steal".
I was thinking this too. How hard would it be to set up a website advertizing amazing deals on pornography, alchohol, wiccan artifacts or any number of things that people get into a religious huff about. Then, instead of delivering the goods each heathen gets a handy bomb delivered to their basement.
I see what you are saying and I think it comes down to this. If the theory that hawking radiation is produced is derived from the same information that the simulation is derived from, very little is shown.
If, however, the simulation is derived from seperate data (experimental, different aspects of BEC theory) then the results could be meaningful as they would show that the two different sets of data are in agreement.
Well, it does prove that either our models of BEC are very accurate or there has been one hell of a coincidence. I don't think that they can say they were the first to discover this, but you may argue that they have produced evidence that supports the theory.
If they had found no radiation, that would not have been proof of anything since a flawed simulation would produce a flawed result. However, the odds of this particular flawed result (producing hawking radiation under very specific circumstances)must be pretty low, lending support to the theory.
I don't know about you but being able to detect what I am seeing directly from a brain scan seems like some degree of mind reading to me. Granted, it can't detect my concious thoughts, but it is definatly pulling information out of my mind.
My question is, can we take this beyond the visual cortex? Why not try the same experiment but have the subjects simply think about different objects. Or alternativly, send in a whiff of apple pie sent and see if the signals for apple pie light up.
I thought I remember reading somewhere that if something went wrong with the shuttle while it was still on the ground, the explosion would be equal to a small nuclear bomb. Unless the excape system moved you a mile away in a matter of seconds I don't think it would do much good.
Slashdot Mirror
And the number one threat to America...
BEARS!!
http://www.livescience.com/space/scienceastronomy/080402-medium-black-holes.html
You get no karma bonus for being modded funny. Knowing this, some moderators choose to mod insightful/interesting instead of funny so people are rewarded for their humour.
So shouldn't the article be about how poor our prediction skills are rather than about how we cling to old tech? In the mainframes case, we cling to it because the concept was updated and still represents the most economically efficient solution to the problem.
The article may as well be asking "Why do personal automobiles keep kicking?". Because they work, and they solve they still solve the problems that they are meant to solve. And when a new problem crops up, (fuel prices/pollution) the solution isn't to get rid of the car, it is to redesign it to address the new concerns; just like IBM and other companies did with mainframes.
Looking at the pictures, it doesn't appear to be a sustained flight drone. I think what they have in mind here is more like hopping form rooftop to rooftop rather than actually flying behind the suspect. The article says "capable" of hovering; would you ride in an airplane that was described by the media as "cabable" of flying?
Ahh "everyone". Certainly nobody would be stupid enough to live these days without a broadband internet connection to their home. Nevermind that half of the population of the US still lives in what is considered "rural" areas.
I can tell you from experience, there remain little to no options for broadband outside population centers of 20,000 people or more. There are some satelite providers but they are very expensive ($100 for a 1 Mb connection). Not to mention a 40 gb un-upgradable hard drive isn't going to get you very far when you are downloading 10-20 gb games.
The linked article was changed from when I originally submitted it; in other words, blame the editors, not me.
Google got exactly what they wanted here, a nationwide network that is forced to be available for thier android platform. They never really wanted the spectrum, if necissary they might have done it anyway but this would have been the prefered result.
Actually, just draw any picture of Mohammad, it doesn't need to be "rude".
It doesn't matter how much inflation has increased since the 1970's, the price of gold has also done so. It remains economically imposible to return to the gold standard, and it is also against the Internation Monetary Fund's policies which the US is a member of.
Inflation is an unfortunate side effect of the poor way we currently run our economy. Trying to adopt the gold standard to curb inflation will not solve the root causes any more than giving an AID's patient an infusion of T-cells will cure HIV.
Let's see, according to the law, corporations are people, right? Do you think we could have comcast declared mentally incompetent?
Ok, once and for all... there is not enough gold mined in the entire world for this to work; even with the ridiculously high price of gold.
It is estimated that there has been 150000 tonnes of gold mined to date about 25% of which is held by other nations as resevse to their currency, most of the rest is held by private citizens as jewelry. Even assuming the total amount, 150000 is about 5.6 billion ounces. 5.6 billion ounces comes to 5.6 trillion USD. The GDP of the US is 13.8 trillion dollars.
If we even tried this plan, the value of gold would have to increase by atleast one, probably two orders of magnitude. The result on the global economy would be absolute chaos.
This is just my gut instinct speaking but... There will be atleast one, probably several international incidents at the Olympics.
Unless the Chinese government totally changes the way they do things, this is inevitable. There will be people taking advantage of the Olympics to do missionary work. There will be people taking advantage of the Olympics to publisize China's many indescretions.
How will the government respond? Are we going to have dozens of people arrested, imprisoned and/or deported? In a way, I almost hope we do, it would open the worlds eyes to just what is happens there, how restricted freedoms really are.
I agree with you that consensus is bad science; unfortunatly, most subjects in science have gone far beyond what I have the time, money, and intellegence to fully understand.
I don't have time to research global warming to the point that I understand all the nuances of the theory. Even if I did, I don't have the money for a computer to run the simulations myself. I am forced to accept the opinion of the poeple who do have the resources to do the research.
The problem is, the issues can then be clouded by politics, the media, or just plain crank science. This means that scientists are forced into vehemently defending their views since if the opposition (who they feel is wrong) gains even a toehold, we end up with evolution deniers and people who honestly believe video games are the direct cause of all violence in society.
Touché, I stand corrected.
This is their wimpy 16 part prototype. Eventually, they hope to control 1024 parts, allowing them to store 4^1024 bits of data with a single pulse... in a single molecule.
I remember the show "Breaking Vegas" had a guy who did exactly that. Press a certain sequence of keys and you are assured a win on the next play.
They have several safegaurds to prevent that kind of thing (especially now). I know that it is illegal for anyone involved in the developement/design/testing to enter a casino. I would imagine that they would have code reviews with a variety of people as well.
Also, that Breaking Vegas show was awesome. They did the big well known ones like the MIT team but also hit some that I had never heard of like the slot machine guy. Other highlights were the shoe computer to calculate the result of ruelette and analyzing the random number generator for keno to figure out the next game.
Your example is earily similar to something that happened to my Mother a few months ago. She works the books for a local grocery store a few times a week along with one other person. One day, almost 10k goes missing.
It was only by watching the video for 8 straight hours that they were able to prove that it was the other person. If it wasn't for the tape my mom probably would have been fired and blacklisted (small town, news travels fast).
Because murder is far too easy as it is. Someone determined enough that doesn't care about dying will always take out a few people first.
Allowing them to scout the territory before they make thier attempt will make it all the easier for them to target either large numbers of poeple or important people.
Look at the Oklahoma City bombing, two guys with a crapload of fertilizer and a uHual. How exactly are the gaurds soposed to stop a truck that rams it's way through the gates, drives up to the commanders mess and blows itself up; all in about 15 seconds.
The document can be copied if it is copied as a whole, but you cannot copy individual pictures/graphs out of it. They have the owner's permission for the first, but not for the second.
Of course, you were refering to their knowledge of technology, not of the law. The point is, our laws should be simple. Why do we need a law that says "don't steal over the internet" and another that says "don't mug people on the streets" and another that says "don't break into people's homes and steal"? There should just be one simple "don't steal".
I was thinking this too. How hard would it be to set up a website advertizing amazing deals on pornography, alchohol, wiccan artifacts or any number of things that people get into a religious huff about. Then, instead of delivering the goods each heathen gets a handy bomb delivered to their basement.
I see what you are saying and I think it comes down to this. If the theory that hawking radiation is produced is derived from the same information that the simulation is derived from, very little is shown.
If, however, the simulation is derived from seperate data (experimental, different aspects of BEC theory) then the results could be meaningful as they would show that the two different sets of data are in agreement.
Well, it does prove that either our models of BEC are very accurate or there has been one hell of a coincidence. I don't think that they can say they were the first to discover this, but you may argue that they have produced evidence that supports the theory.
If they had found no radiation, that would not have been proof of anything since a flawed simulation would produce a flawed result. However, the odds of this particular flawed result (producing hawking radiation under very specific circumstances)must be pretty low, lending support to the theory.
I don't know about you but being able to detect what I am seeing directly from a brain scan seems like some degree of mind reading to me. Granted, it can't detect my concious thoughts, but it is definatly pulling information out of my mind.
My question is, can we take this beyond the visual cortex? Why not try the same experiment but have the subjects simply think about different objects. Or alternativly, send in a whiff of apple pie sent and see if the signals for apple pie light up.
I thought I remember reading somewhere that if something went wrong with the shuttle while it was still on the ground, the explosion would be equal to a small nuclear bomb. Unless the excape system moved you a mile away in a matter of seconds I don't think it would do much good.