Note that tech from the '70s does NOT imply continued improvement from, say 1990 to 2013
Whether that's implied or not, it is true. ABS brakes today are better than they were 20 years ago. More sensors are added every year. Headlights get better. Frames get stronger. Lighter vehicles means the m in f=ma is smaller. Designs are better. Airbags are better, more prevalent and cover more passengers. Are you implying there hasn't been continued improvement in safety?
An LED light may use less energy than an incandescent but for billions on the planet that LED light will use more energy than nothing. No matter how energy efficient you make a refrigerator it will still use more electricity than the absence of one. Conservation and power efficiency are good but they won't reverse energy consumption. The trend of civilization has been to consume more power.
It just needs a little marketing. For a first world country, you just need to charge a ridiculous amount for them and call them something fancy. Works for snails anyway.
Verb
1. Introduce a democratic system or democratic principles to: "public institutions need to be democratized".
2. Make (something) accessible to everyone: "mass production has not democratized fashion".
That was very informative. I would mod you up but I'd rather discuss. I'm not a geneticist, chemist, or a farmer either but you seem to know more about it than I do. I'm curious about what exactly is patented. Is it the enzyme, the dna sequence, the method for gene transfer, all, or some combination? I'm okay with the process being patented but the enzyme and dna could occur through natural or artificial selection. It seems possible at least that non-GMO varieties could develop the same enzyme, not through cross-pollination, but from exposure to the Round-Up herbicide.
I recognize that at least in the U.S., where even non-GMO crops are likely clones, there is probably not enough variety in the gene pool to make the necessary mutations to resist Round-Up without careful breeding. It would appear that weeds develop resistance which implies the possibility that weeds do not care about patents:)
Is it illegal to breed Round-Up resistant corn if it results in the production of the same enzyme?
I think we agree then. Plea bargains are a bad idea. Either they reduce valid charges or they use ridiculous charges to pressure someone into pleading guilty. Either way, no one wins.
A murderer being charged for multiple murders isn't a loophole.
It's not a loophole, it's a flaw. For several reasons. Among them;
If the suspect is truly guilty of the charges then they should serve their time. Why are we letting criminals get away with serving so much less than they should simply because they plead guilty?
Studies show that a great number of innocent people will plead guilty in the plea bargain process. Students were paired with actors to perform a task. They affirmed they would not cheat before the study. Since the other 'student' was an actor, it was fully known whether the person was guilty or not. Many innocent people plead guilty when they are told they can fight the charge of cheating and risk expulsion from school or plead guilty and write an essay.
The only benefit argued by proponents of the plea bargain is that it helps speed up the judicial process for backlogged courts. I don't agree that's even a benefit. If courts are backlogged perhaps we should reassess what we criminalize and prosecute rather than speeding up the conviction process.
The contract said, no servers. He put a server up. So he violated the contract. It's that easy.
It's not really that easy. Can a cable company charge you differently based on the TV you have just because they put it in the contract. When you get a bigger TV can they charge you more? Why should they care how you watch your channels? They should just charge you for the channels.
ISPs wouldn't have this problem if they didn't want to redefine the word unlimited. It shouldn't matter what I use my internet connection for, it should matter how much I use. If my ISP wants to limit how much I use then they should just say so. Telling me how I can use it is un-American. Remember when the Internet was peer to peer. When you could use port 80 if you wanted to. Why should I have to get a business account to run a server that uses less than 10 GB per month but I can have a consumer account and use 1 TB if it's for consumer use? If they don't want people using 77 TB in one month they should put a cap on it, but they shouldn't care why.
I'm curious how a public property would work on an unregulated market. Surely you're not suggesting no regulation. How would an infrastructure not lead to a natural monopoly? AT&T would be the only company if there were no rules. If you think their should be some regulation why don't you suggest that instead of attacking regulation in general?
I'm sure he did. It's almost as if anything can be learned just by reading. In other words, whether or not interface elements are taken for granted is largely irrelevant to whether one can learn how to use something or not.
Thanks for the better source. And I agree with you that most people live under the law's influence. Even in states that don't have a law companies tend to enforce them simply because it's easier to do the same thing at all locations.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it uses the same kernel as ECHELON.
Note that tech from the '70s does NOT imply continued improvement from, say 1990 to 2013
Whether that's implied or not, it is true. ABS brakes today are better than they were 20 years ago. More sensors are added every year. Headlights get better. Frames get stronger. Lighter vehicles means the m in f=ma is smaller. Designs are better. Airbags are better, more prevalent and cover more passengers. Are you implying there hasn't been continued improvement in safety?
An LED light may use less energy than an incandescent but for billions on the planet that LED light will use more energy than nothing. No matter how energy efficient you make a refrigerator it will still use more electricity than the absence of one. Conservation and power efficiency are good but they won't reverse energy consumption. The trend of civilization has been to consume more power.
It just needs a little marketing. For a first world country, you just need to charge a ridiculous amount for them and call them something fancy. Works for snails anyway.
In cases of works made for hire, the employer or commissioning party is considered to be the author
Like this?
Explain why The Grapes of Wrath is $9.99 for the Kindle.
Verb
1. Introduce a democratic system or democratic principles to: "public institutions need to be democratized".
2. Make (something) accessible to everyone: "mass production has not democratized fashion".
That was very informative. I would mod you up but I'd rather discuss. I'm not a geneticist, chemist, or a farmer either but you seem to know more about it than I do. I'm curious about what exactly is patented. Is it the enzyme, the dna sequence, the method for gene transfer, all, or some combination? I'm okay with the process being patented but the enzyme and dna could occur through natural or artificial selection. It seems possible at least that non-GMO varieties could develop the same enzyme, not through cross-pollination, but from exposure to the Round-Up herbicide.
:)
I recognize that at least in the U.S., where even non-GMO crops are likely clones, there is probably not enough variety in the gene pool to make the necessary mutations to resist Round-Up without careful breeding. It would appear that weeds develop resistance which implies the possibility that weeds do not care about patents
Is it illegal to breed Round-Up resistant corn if it results in the production of the same enzyme?
I think we agree then. Plea bargains are a bad idea. Either they reduce valid charges or they use ridiculous charges to pressure someone into pleading guilty. Either way, no one wins.
A murderer being charged for multiple murders isn't a loophole.
It's not a loophole, it's a flaw. For several reasons. Among them;
If the suspect is truly guilty of the charges then they should serve their time. Why are we letting criminals get away with serving so much less than they should simply because they plead guilty?
Studies show that a great number of innocent people will plead guilty in the plea bargain process. Students were paired with actors to perform a task. They affirmed they would not cheat before the study. Since the other 'student' was an actor, it was fully known whether the person was guilty or not. Many innocent people plead guilty when they are told they can fight the charge of cheating and risk expulsion from school or plead guilty and write an essay.
The only benefit argued by proponents of the plea bargain is that it helps speed up the judicial process for backlogged courts. I don't agree that's even a benefit. If courts are backlogged perhaps we should reassess what we criminalize and prosecute rather than speeding up the conviction process.
including giving a product away for free (maybe as a promotion) and the manufacturer cannot retaliate in any way.
I'm not disagreeing with you but I'm reminded of this.
The contract said, no servers. He put a server up. So he violated the contract. It's that easy.
It's not really that easy. Can a cable company charge you differently based on the TV you have just because they put it in the contract. When you get a bigger TV can they charge you more? Why should they care how you watch your channels? They should just charge you for the channels.
ISPs wouldn't have this problem if they didn't want to redefine the word unlimited. It shouldn't matter what I use my internet connection for, it should matter how much I use. If my ISP wants to limit how much I use then they should just say so. Telling me how I can use it is un-American. Remember when the Internet was peer to peer. When you could use port 80 if you wanted to. Why should I have to get a business account to run a server that uses less than 10 GB per month but I can have a consumer account and use 1 TB if it's for consumer use? If they don't want people using 77 TB in one month they should put a cap on it, but they shouldn't care why.
I wasn't disagreeing. I just liked how the video looked.
The hurricanes don't but many smaller systems do. 1 year weather time lapse
Win95, Win98 and Millenium are all version 4. Win2k and Xp were version 5. Windows 3.x preceded Windows 95. At least kernel versions make some sense.
I only use irrational numbers as there are fewer rational numbers.
I'm curious how a public property would work on an unregulated market. Surely you're not suggesting no regulation. How would an infrastructure not lead to a natural monopoly? AT&T would be the only company if there were no rules. If you think their should be some regulation why don't you suggest that instead of attacking regulation in general?
individual companies don't stand a chance of protecting against attacks from the resources available to a nation-state
True for China but not true as a statement. 25 corporations bigger than countries.
I'm sure he did. It's almost as if anything can be learned just by reading. In other words, whether or not interface elements are taken for granted is largely irrelevant to whether one can learn how to use something or not.
Try giving an ipad to an 80 year old woman and you'll see how many interface ideas we take for granted right now.
When my 80 year old grandpa (now 89) bought his first computer he used it to scan 35 mm slides and burn the pictures to CD.
Thanks for the better source. And I agree with you that most people live under the law's influence. Even in states that don't have a law companies tend to enforce them simply because it's easier to do the same thing at all locations.
19 states have laws requiring rest or meal breaks. 31 do not.
Oil is a small part of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_generation#List_of_countries_with_source_of_electricity_2008">electricity generation.