Wouldn't it largely be huge corporations benefiting from so-called 'net neutrality'? If it is going to be required that owners of private property charge the same price to all-comers, then it is going to be more difficult for small businesses to compete with large businesses, no? It seems true net neutrality would be allow anyone to compete as they see fit - if a company is going to 'over charge', then another company should be allowed to come in and 'under charge'.
The size of the company would make no difference. Bits should be charged by quantity not content. It really only affects you if you sell content and bandwidth and want to use the bandwidth as a competitive advantage for your content.
I hate commercials, I change the channel or pick up my phone when the commercials come on.
I don't care for commercials but I don't get the active hate. Commercials are just basically 30 seconds of entertainment with product placement. Given so many shows and movies have product placement and tie-ins now, almost everything is one big commercial.
One thing is new - presidents in the past have left Congress out of the decision making, but the didn't tend to flatly defy Congress, declaring that they have chosen to ignore the law and write their own.
I don't think ignoring Congress is new. This quote may be apocryphal but Jackson's actions, or lack of, aren't. "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". An easy recent target is this. Personally, my humble opinion is that the Executive Branch does have the authority to not enforce a law. However, I do not believe the Executive Branch has the authority to enforce a law that doesn't exist. I say this with trepidation but I think the Executive Branch should only act under approval from Congress (and presumably the Supreme Court), but inaction should ultimately be at the discretion of the Executive Branch. It's one thing for the President not to choose to invade Colorado over Federal drug laws and another to invade Colorado and bust up Coors because the Executive Branch decides alcohol should be banned.
Still interesting to know there's ice (solid water) on Ceres. Makes you wonder from where it came.
Oxygen may be a distant third in abundance in the Milky Way, but being after hydrogen and helium, it makes water one of the most abundant chemical cominations. H and He don't combine under normal circumstances. It doesn't take much for hydrogen and oxygen to make water. You may also notice carbon and nitrogen in the top ten.:)
It is not really young vs old. Language and geography are much bigger factors than age.
I think the perception of young vs old as a manifestation of age is real. I'm going to ramble with an idea a little bit...
Language and geography among other things can and do create barriers between populations. If at least by chance, these populations will have varying resources at their disposal. If wealth leads to health (and typically a lower birthrate) and longevity, a population that has wealth will appear older than one that doesn't. So, while the young may fight on both sides, it is likely, the side of those with money, will have a higher average lifespan and thus on average be older.
This has a reinforcing effect as well. As members of the wealthier society live longer, individuals hold power longer. As such, they will have more experience with the past. This has advantages and disadvantages that merits its own debate but reinforces the idea that old ways are good ways. The poorer population with a lower average age will not be as connected to the past. Again with its own pros and cons. The end result is that old ideas have wealth and these leads to an older population on average. New ideas lack wealth and leads to a younger population on average.
Please bear in mind that I don't mean to imply many in the Ukraine are wealthy by our standards. But I would guess that those that want to go back with old Russia are the ones with the current wealth and power under Russia. Power tends to have generals while rebels have teenagers. I think this perception manifests with conservatives and progressives as well. Politicians on both sides are old, but there is certainly a perception that those that have more and are older tend to be conservative while those that have less and are younger tend to be more progressive. Even though there is much more complexity to being conservative or progressive on any particular issue.
It's not much of a stretch to say Win 9x was still based on DOS. Windows 95 was basically Windows 4.0 and DOS 7.0 bundled together. I'm not saying it wasn't an improvement over 3.1, but its foundation largely ran the same way. The transition from 9x to XP dropped a lot of legacy DOS support because DOS was no longer a part of windows with XP (and other NT kernel OSes).
Windows 9x is a generic term referring to a series of Microsoft Windows computer operating systems produced from 1995 to 2000, which were based on the Windows 95 kernel and its underlying foundation of MS-DOS
--emphasis mine
Windows 9x is a series of hybrid 16/32-bit operating systems.
You could even still boot straight to DOS (command not cmd) and type 'win' to start Windows just like under 3.1. If you still had 3.1 in a directory you could run 'win' from there and still go into win 3.1. Win 9x still had and used the autoexec.bat and config.sys files. Win 9x didn't protect the first meg of memory so you could still reboot the computer by opening a DOS window and writing directly to memory. And there were more websites like this back in the day.
I don't know, Windows XP was the first consumer/client version of Windows to use the NT kernel. That made it pretty good for it's day. For consumers, everything before it, was still based on DOS.
I didn't mean to imply that I wanted names to the exclusion of numbers. I still like version numbers. Although names like Gingerbread, Honeycomb, Ice Cream and Jelly Bean aren't hard to figure out. Silly names aside, some of the others follow a similar convention.
I used to not care for naming releases. Just give me version numbers. However, I've changed my mind. Now I find it more fruitful to search for issues with a particular version by name rather than by number.
and Windows 2003. And technically NT came in versions 3.1, 3.5, 3.51 and 4.0. I don't remember NT 3.1 and 3.5 well, but 3.51 was nice and snappy. You really felt the preemptive multitasking. I thought NT 4.0 was meh. It added the Win95 desktop and it sort of tried to do plug-n-play if you installed it through the CLI. NT 4.0 just seemed kludgy and the snappiness that 3.51 had with multitasking seemed gone. At any rate, none of these were considered consumer OSes. The good version/bad version meme is usually based on consumer versions of Windows.
The main cost here is spare parts storage - something you need to have anyway. Replacting some storage space with a very expencive 3D printer (you really thought they want to use a 300$ one? think again) makes no sense, you get lower quality parts and making them takes longer than it would take for you to get the parts from storage.
The military is considering the logistics of access to storage in a battle. It may be considerably cheaper to take a 3D printer and some material to the front than backups of all your parts. I recall reading somewhere that warships tended to carry 3 replacement parts for everything. Since you never know what's going to break you have to carry much more than necessary. A 3D printer should require much less mass and storage since you only need material for the things that actually break, instead of material for everything that might break. The costs of moving backup lenses in hundreds of styles around a battlefield may make 3D printing them more economically viable.
Did you look at any of the links returned by your search? The first one is about the return of amateur science. The second is your post. The 3rd is about a novel. The fourth is an explanation of how transistors work. The fifth is a blog about the importance of science. The sixth is actually a list of amateur scientist that changed the world (kind of the exact opposite you were going for). I did not see any links explaining why I should be wary of armchair scientists. Anyone can follow the scientific method.
Posting search results is a bad idea for a source. For starters, Google tailors search results to a great number of things including IP address. In other words, Google won't necessarily return the same results for me as it does for you. Another reason it's a bad idea, is you're not really providing a source. You're simply claiming something and then telling us to look it up if we don't believe you.
Mendel and Faraday were amateurs whose work we still use and teach today. From your results I learned a little factoid. One amateur scientist liked to collect sea shells and wound up discovering several dinosaurs. She became someone known for selling her sea shells which is the source of the tongue twister. She sells sea shells by the sea shore...
Science is science. It makes little difference whether it comes from authority or not. If the science is good then it's good. If not, it's not. To argue that amateur scientist 'suck' is kind of an argument from authority and generally considered a logical fallacy.
Thanks, that helped me understand support for dark matter as well. For clarification though, would it be fair to say that we do use the same math and when the answer didn't fit our prediction, we didn't change the math, but rather assumed the math is right and that we must not be able to observe all of the mass?
Planets orbit Sol. An exoplanet is a planet that orbits any star that is not named Sol. Maybe it's useful to say 'we've discovered X number of exoplanets' at this point of discovery, but I imagine it will get dropped eventually. Scientist don't usually stick with anthropocentric terminology.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't it largely be huge corporations benefiting from so-called 'net neutrality'? If it is going to be required that owners of private property charge the same price to all-comers, then it is going to be more difficult for small businesses to compete with large businesses, no? It seems true net neutrality would be allow anyone to compete as they see fit - if a company is going to 'over charge', then another company should be allowed to come in and 'under charge'.
The size of the company would make no difference. Bits should be charged by quantity not content. It really only affects you if you sell content and bandwidth and want to use the bandwidth as a competitive advantage for your content.
If budgets come in to play at all, it might be a close one.
I hate commercials, I change the channel or pick up my phone when the commercials come on.
I don't care for commercials but I don't get the active hate. Commercials are just basically 30 seconds of entertainment with product placement. Given so many shows and movies have product placement and tie-ins now, almost everything is one big commercial.
One thing is new - presidents in the past have left Congress out of the decision making, but the didn't tend to flatly defy Congress, declaring that they have chosen to ignore the law and write their own.
I don't think ignoring Congress is new. This quote may be apocryphal but Jackson's actions, or lack of, aren't. "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!". An easy recent target is this. Personally, my humble opinion is that the Executive Branch does have the authority to not enforce a law. However, I do not believe the Executive Branch has the authority to enforce a law that doesn't exist. I say this with trepidation but I think the Executive Branch should only act under approval from Congress (and presumably the Supreme Court), but inaction should ultimately be at the discretion of the Executive Branch. It's one thing for the President not to choose to invade Colorado over Federal drug laws and another to invade Colorado and bust up Coors because the Executive Branch decides alcohol should be banned.
The square-root of negative one is probably taken.
Still interesting to know there's ice (solid water) on Ceres. Makes you wonder from where it came.
Oxygen may be a distant third in abundance in the Milky Way, but being after hydrogen and helium, it makes water one of the most abundant chemical cominations. H and He don't combine under normal circumstances. It doesn't take much for hydrogen and oxygen to make water. You may also notice carbon and nitrogen in the top ten. :)
It is not really young vs old. Language and geography are much bigger factors than age.
I think the perception of young vs old as a manifestation of age is real. I'm going to ramble with an idea a little bit...
.02 on the young vs old.
Language and geography among other things can and do create barriers between populations. If at least by chance, these populations will have varying resources at their disposal. If wealth leads to health (and typically a lower birthrate) and longevity, a population that has wealth will appear older than one that doesn't. So, while the young may fight on both sides, it is likely, the side of those with money, will have a higher average lifespan and thus on average be older.
This has a reinforcing effect as well. As members of the wealthier society live longer, individuals hold power longer. As such, they will have more experience with the past. This has advantages and disadvantages that merits its own debate but reinforces the idea that old ways are good ways. The poorer population with a lower average age will not be as connected to the past. Again with its own pros and cons. The end result is that old ideas have wealth and these leads to an older population on average. New ideas lack wealth and leads to a younger population on average.
Please bear in mind that I don't mean to imply many in the Ukraine are wealthy by our standards. But I would guess that those that want to go back with old Russia are the ones with the current wealth and power under Russia. Power tends to have generals while rebels have teenagers. I think this perception manifests with conservatives and progressives as well. Politicians on both sides are old, but there is certainly a perception that those that have more and are older tend to be conservative while those that have less and are younger tend to be more progressive. Even though there is much more complexity to being conservative or progressive on any particular issue.
Well, there's my
Where can I pirate these security updates? :)
Windows 9x is a generic term referring to a series of Microsoft Windows computer operating systems produced from 1995 to 2000, which were based on the Windows 95 kernel and its underlying foundation of MS-DOS
--emphasis mine
Windows 9x is a series of hybrid 16/32-bit operating systems.
You could even still boot straight to DOS (command not cmd) and type 'win' to start Windows just like under 3.1. If you still had 3.1 in a directory you could run 'win' from there and still go into win 3.1. Win 9x still had and used the autoexec.bat and config.sys files. Win 9x didn't protect the first meg of memory so you could still reboot the computer by opening a DOS window and writing directly to memory. And there were more websites like this back in the day.
I don't know, Windows XP was the first consumer/client version of Windows to use the NT kernel. That made it pretty good for it's day. For consumers, everything before it, was still based on DOS.
Software would still be covered by copyright.
I bet you could use Web 3.0!
I'm going to wait for Web 3.11 for Workgroups.
I didn't mean to imply that I wanted names to the exclusion of numbers. I still like version numbers. Although names like Gingerbread, Honeycomb, Ice Cream and Jelly Bean aren't hard to figure out. Silly names aside, some of the others follow a similar convention.
I used to not care for naming releases. Just give me version numbers. However, I've changed my mind. Now I find it more fruitful to search for issues with a particular version by name rather than by number.
and Windows 2003. And technically NT came in versions 3.1, 3.5, 3.51 and 4.0. I don't remember NT 3.1 and 3.5 well, but 3.51 was nice and snappy. You really felt the preemptive multitasking. I thought NT 4.0 was meh. It added the Win95 desktop and it sort of tried to do plug-n-play if you installed it through the CLI. NT 4.0 just seemed kludgy and the snappiness that 3.51 had with multitasking seemed gone. At any rate, none of these were considered consumer OSes. The good version/bad version meme is usually based on consumer versions of Windows.
You're as ignorant of science as you are of economics.
He's not totally off-base on the science.
and yes, I could reduce the volume by turning off the catchall inbox feature
I use the catchall feature with a second email account. I just check it when I need/want to.
A USB remote is nice too.
The main cost here is spare parts storage - something you need to have anyway. Replacting some storage space with a very expencive 3D printer (you really thought they want to use a 300$ one? think again) makes no sense, you get lower quality parts and making them takes longer than it would take for you to get the parts from storage.
The military is considering the logistics of access to storage in a battle. It may be considerably cheaper to take a 3D printer and some material to the front than backups of all your parts. I recall reading somewhere that warships tended to carry 3 replacement parts for everything. Since you never know what's going to break you have to carry much more than necessary. A 3D printer should require much less mass and storage since you only need material for the things that actually break, instead of material for everything that might break. The costs of moving backup lenses in hundreds of styles around a battlefield may make 3D printing them more economically viable.
Are you referring to the Global Consciousness Project? The research mentions RNGs. Criticism is also mentioned.
Did you look at any of the links returned by your search? The first one is about the return of amateur science. The second is your post. The 3rd is about a novel. The fourth is an explanation of how transistors work. The fifth is a blog about the importance of science. The sixth is actually a list of amateur scientist that changed the world (kind of the exact opposite you were going for). I did not see any links explaining why I should be wary of armchair scientists. Anyone can follow the scientific method.
Posting search results is a bad idea for a source. For starters, Google tailors search results to a great number of things including IP address. In other words, Google won't necessarily return the same results for me as it does for you. Another reason it's a bad idea, is you're not really providing a source. You're simply claiming something and then telling us to look it up if we don't believe you.
Mendel and Faraday were amateurs whose work we still use and teach today. From your results I learned a little factoid. One amateur scientist liked to collect sea shells and wound up discovering several dinosaurs. She became someone known for selling her sea shells which is the source of the tongue twister. She sells sea shells by the sea shore...
Science is science. It makes little difference whether it comes from authority or not. If the science is good then it's good. If not, it's not. To argue that amateur scientist 'suck' is kind of an argument from authority and generally considered a logical fallacy.
Thanks, that helped me understand support for dark matter as well. For clarification though, would it be fair to say that we do use the same math and when the answer didn't fit our prediction, we didn't change the math, but rather assumed the math is right and that we must not be able to observe all of the mass?
Could you expand on that? What are the two maths? Isn't a fundamental premise of physics that the laws behave the same everywhere in the Universe.
Planets orbit Sol. An exoplanet is a planet that orbits any star that is not named Sol. Maybe it's useful to say 'we've discovered X number of exoplanets' at this point of discovery, but I imagine it will get dropped eventually. Scientist don't usually stick with anthropocentric terminology.
wheres the nexus?
Complex software. Recognizing objects in images and video seem to be one thing search, autonomous cars, and military robots have in common.