But, there are strong(ish) market pressures to design and develop just this type of vehicle, and it will likely be about refinement rather than innovation, because plenty of platforms close to this already exist.
I don't know, it seems like something plain old market pressure would bring about eventually, without the need for the x-prize. I hell, I doubt this would even have much of an effect on the car driving public, as I doubt it will get highly fuel efficient cars to market any sooner.
It kinda seems like an X-Prize for making a really big, flat, HD TV. Companies are going to throw money at it anyway, they don't need to be inspired to do it. It does kinda set a benchmark for what is wanted, give designers specific goals, but I just don't think it'll matter too much.
start>run
cmd
ok
ftp ftp-mozilla.netscape.com
anonymous
binary
get "/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/3.0b4/win32/en-US/Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 4.exe"
bye
"Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 4.exe"
it's not quite as easy as in linux, but totally doable in widows.
well, that and the whole being able to keep a HALE on station. Balloons get pushed around by the wind, so even if they stayed afloat, they would end up where they were you didn't need them.
Don't forget pantone pallets, which will always cost money to distribute, and most folks are to lazy to track down separately.
I actually prefer a much of GIMP's UI to photoshop at the moment, though I haven't used CS3 yet.
I think there is a fair argument for not doing so. A fair argument for them becoming content cops. A fair argument for them already being loudly against such enforcement, seeing as the won't spank comcast breaking existing laws.
I don't really have the power or money to defend my interests. Telecoms do. I don't have an army of lobbyists and lawyers. Telecoms do. The closest thing I have to a real representatives is Google and FLOSS friendly companies like SUN, and that's only because, many of, our interests happen to be the same at the moment.
I hate sounding like a librarian, but in a very real way, without making too much of a slippery slope out of the issue, power is a zero sum game, and giving more power to the government mean less power for the people. I don't know if it is worth giving even more power to the FCC in exchange for the slim chance they will do something to benefit me.
I want a clear law that says 'Hey, fuckers. You can't do that. If you do that x, y, and z, will happen.' I want affected companies and state's attorneys to be able to bring suits with regard to this. I don't want to give more power to an organization who's actions I already frequently disagree with.
Something about a large quantity of a molten(sodium) metal that burn in the presence of water and is explosive when exposed to the air. If something goes wrong, it could easily go very very wrong.
Compared with pebble bed reactors or even current light water reactors, there is a fair bit more danger.
They use more of the fuel, create less waste and the waste they create is safer, but it is not like they don't have some rather significant drawbacks, which may prevent them from ever seeing widespread use. They are of course illegal under international treaties as well, but that could be changed more easily than the technical stuff(probably would be too, if they were to get the technical stuff settled and there was political support).
Uhh... I was under the impression that finer grained transmitters were exactly what all this whitespace hubbub was about. Because FM is FM, a given carrier frequency uses the adjacent frequencies. To allow stuff to actually work, there is some amount of a required gap between these carrier frequencies. The mandated gap is actually greater than necessary, and this is the white space.
Finer grained transmitters is exactly what TFA is talking about, and it is a fairly real answerer. That, or I'm talking out my bottom, or you know all this and I totally miss the point of your post.
I'm pretty sure you are right, as just earlier this year there was an example of the very rapid evolution in an insect population you describe. It was with butterflies and on an island, and the disease in question only affected the male half of the population. The disease in question was very virulent, and this lead to a very strong selection of those with immunity and almost zero competition from those who were not. The immunity spread throughout the population within a few generations.
In this case, there are already many mosquitoes that would not be effected by this. Though in the short term it would likely have some effect, unless it was repeated every single year, pretty much forever, the mosquito population would likely rebound rapidly. It, of course, is not the same exact situation, but it does point to the resilience of insect populations, and the ability of highly beneficial genetic traits to rapidly spread within them.
Honestly, 'illegal' is kinda stretching the definition of the laws the exist. I'm not totally sure of the EU, but things like this, at least in the States, are a tad more gray. Weighing the effects on the user, competition and effects on the company in question. Being expected to follow certain principals, is a bit different some finely described bit of tax code. It's closer to fair use, and most know what a mess that is.
In addition, here at least, the courts are rather incapable of actually preventing much in the way of software being implemented. I don't know of any restraining orders regarding anti-competitive practices and a new service or product, that prevented said product from initially going to market. These courts and commissions are not exactly geared to be proactive. If Microsoft was doing it in response to a court order, they could have oversight. Otherwise, I doubt there is much they could or would do.
The main issue that the courts have found with bundeling is that the software can not easily be removed by vendors or consumers. If such a package system was used, it is rather implied that this would not be an issue. The laws are not just about leveraging one's position, but doing so unfairly. This would be a lot closer to fair. Probably more so than expecting windows to be the only operating system to be distributed without a media player, browser and other fairly essential bits users would require out of the box, which is what you seem to be advocating. Honestly, 'illegal' is kinda stretching the definition of the laws the exist. I'm not totally sure of the EU, but things like this, at least in the States, are a tad more gray. Weighing the effects on the user, competition and effects on the company in question. Being expected to follow certain principals, is a bit different some finely described bit of tax code. It's closer to fair use, and most know what a mess that is.
In addition, here at least, the courts are rather incapable of actually preventing much in the way of software being implemented. I don't know of any restraining orders regarding anti-competitive practices and a new service or product, that prevented said product from initially going to market. These courts and commissions are not exactly geared to be proactive. If Microsoft was doing it in response to a court order, they could have oversight. Otherwise, I doubt there is much they could or would do.
The main issue that the courts have found with bundeling is that the software can not easily be removed by vendors or consumers. If such a package system was used, it is rather implied that this would not be an issue. The laws are not just about leveraging one's position, but doing so unfairly. This would be a lot closer to fair. Probably more so than expecting windows to be the only operating system to be distributed without a media player, browser and other fairly essential bits users would require out of the box, which is what you seem to be advocating.
Ehh... if the wire is mostly frayed, due presumably to improper installation, it could have the same result, without actually producing an over volt/amp situation. The power supply is putting out the right electricity(but the wire can't dissipate the heat generated by the added resistance(your effectively running a smaller gauge wire). The power supply would have no way of knowing where the load is coming from, and would not generate a fault.
Tied in with poor quality control and rough handling during shipping, and I could pretty easily believe it.
Between the enterprise and government sectors, there could be an awful lot of pressure applied. When you look at the amount of resources that they are committing to a format, it would be in their best interests to contractually ensure that it will still be viable down the road, even after the information has sat on the server so long the format or even its replacement has been depreciated.
While the information could of course still be recovered in such a situation, there is no reason large companies or the government should except the potential expense of having to convert a potentially massive amount of information from legacy formats, potentially through several others using antiquated software. They have a major vested interest in ensuring the operability of the formats they use and the power to demand it. They just need to realize it and combine their influence to achieve it.
or they could just switch to using open standards, of course.
Doesn't even need to be downloaded. Just include them on install CD/HDD, and let the user choose what to install when Windows first runs. Add to it a kinda robust package manager that can connect to the internet(which people would be forced to see at least once, so they will be likely to look to it), and now not only do they get around all the anti-trust bundling stuff, but they still get to leverage free(as in beer) products and services to their customers.
Could even turn it into a revenue stream, by letting closed developers place products in it, for a fee of course.
Similar systems have done a lot of make linux easier to use. MS's efforts would be different enough that patent issues wouldn't be much of a concern(It's MS anyway, rite?). It gets them out of the anti-trust stuff, while still letting them have some control over product preference. Less educated users get a better experience, because they would have easy access (theoretically) reliable and trustworthy software, ideally much of it with little additional out of pocket cost. Of course they could data-mine what type of software their customers are looking for, which they can't do when they use Google.
They'd eventually get sued to force them to allow Mozilla and other large developers to include software, but because they could still charge a reasonable and fairly uniform fee it would still keep a lot of FLOSS out if they choose to. It would probably become yet another vector for naughtiness, but that seems true of everything they make, and really should be avoidable.
Not that it will happen of course, but I think it could be made to their benefit and that of their customers--without being too evil or anti-competitive.
It's significantly less that 1 percent of our national budget. Around 17 billion for 2007.
The Iraq War comparison isn't really all that impressive once you do the math. At a couple of hundred million dollars a day, it's closer to 100 days or just over 3 months..6% of our National Budget really does sound a lot better than a quarter of a year in Iraq.
I'd post links but I suck at html, it's early, and there isn't a lot to debate about the numbers.
saw this and my first thought was you could rig it as a wearable hud or windshield projection for a car.
neat idea, and the price tag doesn't sound horrible for a fairly new product. Might eventually be semi-disposable eventually opening it up for entertaining things like electronic graffiti. though the range is probably pretty limited even at night. All sorts of nifty uses for something like this.
Well, the article seems to be comparing it to "do not call lists" and talks about being on the list to not have your information distributed.
I think they are using the terminology oddly. As I'm reading it, it is a list which people can join, which allows them to opt-out of the free service of having your information sold to the highest bidder.
"The basic concept is to prevent collecting information without the consumer's consent," Blumenthal said.
"If the consumer objects to collecting the information and says, 'Do not track me when I travel the Internet,' that wish should be respected, and this law would compel marketers to protect that right under consumer privacy."
seems to really be opt-in, and they are just misusing the term, but I could be mistaken. They could be doing something pretty great and kinda new when it comes to protecting consumers, but being them politicians I pretty much doubt it.
I'd totally want an oven I could pre-heat remotely. Most other appliances, are pretty much ready to use when you get to them. It is kinda to have most be web enabled, but saving 20 minutes of waiting around doing nothing, could be rather handy (my time is really just that valuable).
Maybe a built in heat resistant webcam, so I would have to worry about coming home to a smoking ruin, would be a nice touch.
Considering the somewhat recent remote code execution exploit using IE to send poisoned url requests(wrong term, I'm sure) to firefox, wouldn't this possibly make your browsing less secure? While that bug was patched, similar problems could be found down the road. In addition, you have twice as many potential issues, and personally I have a hard enough time keeping track of holes in one browser's security.
Combined with obvious problems with things like Trojans getting past the unsecured browser effecting things at a more fundamental level than just the browser, this doesn't seem like all the much added security. I could see it being effective for privacy protection(it would make things like tracking cookies less effective), but there are certainly better ways of managing such issues.
Slashdot Mirror
mass.
But, there are strong(ish) market pressures to design and develop just this type of vehicle, and it will likely be about refinement rather than innovation, because plenty of platforms close to this already exist. I don't know, it seems like something plain old market pressure would bring about eventually, without the need for the x-prize. I hell, I doubt this would even have much of an effect on the car driving public, as I doubt it will get highly fuel efficient cars to market any sooner. It kinda seems like an X-Prize for making a really big, flat, HD TV. Companies are going to throw money at it anyway, they don't need to be inspired to do it. It does kinda set a benchmark for what is wanted, give designers specific goals, but I just don't think it'll matter too much.
start>run
cmd
ok
ftp ftp-mozilla.netscape.com
anonymous
binary
get "/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/3.0b4/win32/en-US/Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 4.exe"
bye
"Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 4.exe"
it's not quite as easy as in linux, but totally doable in widows.
Turning off HTML formatting or using the preview button... now that's hard.
start>run cmd ok ftp ftp-mozilla.netscape.com anonymous binary get "/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/3.0b4/win32/en-US/Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 4.exe" bye "Firefox Setup 3.0 Beta 4.exe" it's not quite as easy as in linux, but totally doable in widows.
Only one? That's some shows some serious restraint.
well, that and the whole being able to keep a HALE on station. Balloons get pushed around by the wind, so even if they stayed afloat, they would end up where they were you didn't need them.
Imperial shittones also only work on earth. Screw that mucking about with shitslugs nonsense.
Don't forget pantone pallets, which will always cost money to distribute, and most folks are to lazy to track down separately. I actually prefer a much of GIMP's UI to photoshop at the moment, though I haven't used CS3 yet.
This assumes that we trust the FCC.
I think there is a fair argument for not doing so. A fair argument for them becoming content cops. A fair argument for them already being loudly against such enforcement, seeing as the won't spank comcast breaking existing laws.
I don't really have the power or money to defend my interests. Telecoms do. I don't have an army of lobbyists and lawyers. Telecoms do. The closest thing I have to a real representatives is Google and FLOSS friendly companies like SUN, and that's only because, many of, our interests happen to be the same at the moment.
I hate sounding like a librarian, but in a very real way, without making too much of a slippery slope out of the issue, power is a zero sum game, and giving more power to the government mean less power for the people. I don't know if it is worth giving even more power to the FCC in exchange for the slim chance they will do something to benefit me.
I want a clear law that says 'Hey, fuckers. You can't do that. If you do that x, y, and z, will happen.' I want affected companies and state's attorneys to be able to bring suits with regard to this. I don't want to give more power to an organization who's actions I already frequently disagree with.
Fast breeder reactors scare the hell out of me.
Something about a large quantity of a molten(sodium) metal that burn in the presence of water and is explosive when exposed to the air. If something goes wrong, it could easily go very very wrong.
Compared with pebble bed reactors or even current light water reactors, there is a fair bit more danger.
They use more of the fuel, create less waste and the waste they create is safer, but it is not like they don't have some rather significant drawbacks, which may prevent them from ever seeing widespread use. They are of course illegal under international treaties as well, but that could be changed more easily than the technical stuff(probably would be too, if they were to get the technical stuff settled and there was political support).
Uhh... I was under the impression that finer grained transmitters were exactly what all this whitespace hubbub was about. Because FM is FM, a given carrier frequency uses the adjacent frequencies. To allow stuff to actually work, there is some amount of a required gap between these carrier frequencies. The mandated gap is actually greater than necessary, and this is the white space.
Finer grained transmitters is exactly what TFA is talking about, and it is a fairly real answerer. That, or I'm talking out my bottom, or you know all this and I totally miss the point of your post.
The performance of DX10 only games is greatly improved using DX10 over DX9.
It causes the 'don't work in dx9' flag to not be parsed, which improves frame rates by as much as 100%.
This dovetails nicely into my little version of the statement.
"Lucky you, I call them salesmen."
I'm pretty sure you are right, as just earlier this year there was an example of the very rapid evolution in an insect population you describe. It was with butterflies and on an island, and the disease in question only affected the male half of the population. The disease in question was very virulent, and this lead to a very strong selection of those with immunity and almost zero competition from those who were not. The immunity spread throughout the population within a few generations.
In this case, there are already many mosquitoes that would not be effected by this. Though in the short term it would likely have some effect, unless it was repeated every single year, pretty much forever, the mosquito population would likely rebound rapidly. It, of course, is not the same exact situation, but it does point to the resilience of insect populations, and the ability of highly beneficial genetic traits to rapidly spread within them.
link
unless there were more optics that corrected for that as well.
eye | lens(1) | image making stuff | lens(2) | object
lens 1 allows you to focus on the overlay. Lens 2 corrects for lens 1.
Not sure if the result would be all that comfortable to wear though.
Honestly, 'illegal' is kinda stretching the definition of the laws the exist. I'm not totally sure of the EU, but things like this, at least in the States, are a tad more gray. Weighing the effects on the user, competition and effects on the company in question. Being expected to follow certain principals, is a bit different some finely described bit of tax code. It's closer to fair use, and most know what a mess that is.
In addition, here at least, the courts are rather incapable of actually preventing much in the way of software being implemented. I don't know of any restraining orders regarding anti-competitive practices and a new service or product, that prevented said product from initially going to market. These courts and commissions are not exactly geared to be proactive. If Microsoft was doing it in response to a court order, they could have oversight. Otherwise, I doubt there is much they could or would do.
The main issue that the courts have found with bundeling is that the software can not easily be removed by vendors or consumers. If such a package system was used, it is rather implied that this would not be an issue. The laws are not just about leveraging one's position, but doing so unfairly. This would be a lot closer to fair. Probably more so than expecting windows to be the only operating system to be distributed without a media player, browser and other fairly essential bits users would require out of the box, which is what you seem to be advocating. Honestly, 'illegal' is kinda stretching the definition of the laws the exist. I'm not totally sure of the EU, but things like this, at least in the States, are a tad more gray. Weighing the effects on the user, competition and effects on the company in question. Being expected to follow certain principals, is a bit different some finely described bit of tax code. It's closer to fair use, and most know what a mess that is.
In addition, here at least, the courts are rather incapable of actually preventing much in the way of software being implemented. I don't know of any restraining orders regarding anti-competitive practices and a new service or product, that prevented said product from initially going to market. These courts and commissions are not exactly geared to be proactive. If Microsoft was doing it in response to a court order, they could have oversight. Otherwise, I doubt there is much they could or would do.
The main issue that the courts have found with bundeling is that the software can not easily be removed by vendors or consumers. If such a package system was used, it is rather implied that this would not be an issue. The laws are not just about leveraging one's position, but doing so unfairly. This would be a lot closer to fair. Probably more so than expecting windows to be the only operating system to be distributed without a media player, browser and other fairly essential bits users would require out of the box, which is what you seem to be advocating.
Ehh... if the wire is mostly frayed, due presumably to improper installation, it could have the same result, without actually producing an over volt/amp situation. The power supply is putting out the right electricity(but the wire can't dissipate the heat generated by the added resistance(your effectively running a smaller gauge wire). The power supply would have no way of knowing where the load is coming from, and would not generate a fault.
Tied in with poor quality control and rough handling during shipping, and I could pretty easily believe it.
Between the enterprise and government sectors, there could be an awful lot of pressure applied. When you look at the amount of resources that they are committing to a format, it would be in their best interests to contractually ensure that it will still be viable down the road, even after the information has sat on the server so long the format or even its replacement has been depreciated.
While the information could of course still be recovered in such a situation, there is no reason large companies or the government should except the potential expense of having to convert a potentially massive amount of information from legacy formats, potentially through several others using antiquated software. They have a major vested interest in ensuring the operability of the formats they use and the power to demand it. They just need to realize it and combine their influence to achieve it.
or they could just switch to using open standards, of course.
Doesn't even need to be downloaded. Just include them on install CD/HDD, and let the user choose what to install when Windows first runs. Add to it a kinda robust package manager that can connect to the internet(which people would be forced to see at least once, so they will be likely to look to it), and now not only do they get around all the anti-trust bundling stuff, but they still get to leverage free(as in beer) products and services to their customers.
Could even turn it into a revenue stream, by letting closed developers place products in it, for a fee of course.
Similar systems have done a lot of make linux easier to use. MS's efforts would be different enough that patent issues wouldn't be much of a concern(It's MS anyway, rite?). It gets them out of the anti-trust stuff, while still letting them have some control over product preference. Less educated users get a better experience, because they would have easy access (theoretically) reliable and trustworthy software, ideally much of it with little additional out of pocket cost. Of course they could data-mine what type of software their customers are looking for, which they can't do when they use Google.
They'd eventually get sued to force them to allow Mozilla and other large developers to include software, but because they could still charge a reasonable and fairly uniform fee it would still keep a lot of FLOSS out if they choose to. It would probably become yet another vector for naughtiness, but that seems true of everything they make, and really should be avoidable.
Not that it will happen of course, but I think it could be made to their benefit and that of their customers--without being too evil or anti-competitive.
It's significantly less that 1 percent of our national budget. Around 17 billion for 2007.
.6% of our National Budget really does sound a lot better than a quarter of a year in Iraq.
The Iraq War comparison isn't really all that impressive once you do the math. At a couple of hundred million dollars a day, it's closer to 100 days or just over 3 months.
I'd post links but I suck at html, it's early, and there isn't a lot to debate about the numbers.
saw this and my first thought was you could rig it as a wearable hud or windshield projection for a car. neat idea, and the price tag doesn't sound horrible for a fairly new product. Might eventually be semi-disposable eventually opening it up for entertaining things like electronic graffiti. though the range is probably pretty limited even at night. All sorts of nifty uses for something like this.
I think they are using the terminology oddly. As I'm reading it, it is a list which people can join, which allows them to opt-out of the free service of having your information sold to the highest bidder.
seems to really be opt-in, and they are just misusing the term, but I could be mistaken. They could be doing something pretty great and kinda new when it comes to protecting consumers, but being them politicians I pretty much doubt it.
A lot of people have been breaking the first two rules of NNTP.
I'd totally want an oven I could pre-heat remotely. Most other appliances, are pretty much ready to use when you get to them. It is kinda to have most be web enabled, but saving 20 minutes of waiting around doing nothing, could be rather handy (my time is really just that valuable). Maybe a built in heat resistant webcam, so I would have to worry about coming home to a smoking ruin, would be a nice touch.
Considering the somewhat recent remote code execution exploit using IE to send poisoned url requests(wrong term, I'm sure) to firefox, wouldn't this possibly make your browsing less secure? While that bug was patched, similar problems could be found down the road. In addition, you have twice as many potential issues, and personally I have a hard enough time keeping track of holes in one browser's security.
Combined with obvious problems with things like Trojans getting past the unsecured browser effecting things at a more fundamental level than just the browser, this doesn't seem like all the much added security. I could see it being effective for privacy protection(it would make things like tracking cookies less effective), but there are certainly better ways of managing such issues.
Just seems silly.