The market price for one of these buggers, paid in twenties, should easily approach 450 grams. At least it'll free us up to buy that slimmer wallet we've always wanted.
Actually, I'd be reluctant to call it a Chinese wall. Chinese walls, so named after the Great Wall of China, are an artificially constructed/enforced separation between two groups, preventing all communication between them about certain matters. It's most commonly seen in securities firms, where one department is not allowed to have access to insider information from another department for fear of FTC violations.
Come to think of it, that doesn't sound so far off after all. I'd still go with "clean room", though.
On the plus side, you can't take the pee out of the swimming pool.
Actually, we've had a lot of success on the piss-removal front, with our enormous dialysis machine. If only we were having as much success with our put-the-cows-back-in-the-barn-after-the-barn-door- has-been-left-open device, codenamed border collie.
Of course there's the other side to this, where people will want to synthesize certain chemcials in opiates or marijuana... Fun to speculate about, at least!
No kidding. Some day, it'll be feasible for someone to graft a THC gene into his own body so that he basically pisses marijuana. It's already silly for governments to wage war on a naturally occurring feral plant, but how much sillier will it be when it's no longer an external plant but instead one's own body? What'll happen when some enterprising and politically conscious person hacks his own genetic code so as to shit pellets with DeCSS engraved on them? Will his own offspring be contraband?
Keep repainting the manifesto on the side of the barn in the middle of the night. Eventually, you end up with "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."
The force of gravity at the surface of the more massive one would be greater. What would be smaller, however, is the difference in gravity between at the surface and, say, two feet above the surface. That's what tidal forces are about: the slope of the gradient, not the values along the way.
Quite frankly, infinities are well justified in this discussion. We're talking about a singularity, for pete's sake. It's an enormous amount of mass squashed into zero volume -- not just approaching zero, but actually zero. Inside it is where Einstein's equations breakdown and generate infinite lengths for objects having fallen into it. It's a truly peculiar beast.
(Besides, as an aside, you can still have different degrees of infinity. The number of integers is infinitely large but it's still infinitely smaller than the number of irrational numbers.)
Or... tidal forces are much larger around a smaller black hole, could this have anything to do with it?
That was my first knee-jerk thought, but it's silly if you think about it. Tidal forces don't help you pull the matter in any faster. They just make things more painful for the object being sucked in.
I can't remember the term for it off the top of my head, but as light is emitted by a massive object, it is redshifted a bit, where the amount of redshift corrolates with how massive the object is. Blackholes are merely massive enough to cause an effectively infinite redshift.
There'd be an enormous observable doppler effect. Two blackholes rotating around each other (besides being improbable) would have to revolve at an enormous speed in order to avoid collapsing from their enormous gravitational pulls.
And why are you mentioning special relativity? Special relativity is all about not taking gravity into account, and blackholes are all about gravity.
You're either karma whoring or trolling, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on the former. So let's see...:
Is it just me, or is assuring the quality of open source projects (both in terms of openness and functionality) more or less impossible? I mean, by its nature, open source holds no associations to any governing bodies that carry sway.
Nope, it's just you. There's nothing inherently anti-authoritarian about open-source software (unlike perhaps for how you can make such a case for free software). In fact, open-source software often strictly adheres to the will of one central author who deigns to accept patches from others and folds them into his own project. Linux is perhaps a complicated example, but other projects like Ghostscript illustrate the point.
Industries that market tangible products have no problems creating standardization bureaus and bodies, usually because these sorts of things can be governed in turn by governments, by qualified authorities, by laws.
While this may be true, it's misleading. Standardization bureaus are created all the time in the absence of official government intervention -- they normally go by the name "cartels". If companies can benefit through collusion and can especially marginalize those who do not agree to participate, then they consistently have done so. All you need is a mechanism to keep them from stabbing each other in the back and fragmenting the resulting efforts, and the GPL adequately addresses that problem.
Could the FCC have been created without respected, universally trusted leadership? Doubtful. Who then will take on the challenge of developing an overseer for open-source?
The FCC was created by fiat, not by consensus. Moreover, its purposes --regulating a scarce commodity (spectra) and preventing broadcasters from degrading each other's signals through collision-- make for no remarkable analogy in the software industry.
Software is quickly becoming a commodity, and initiatives like these merely encourage companies to take up an open-source project, rebrand it, and sell it. It's much more like IETF standards in that typically, an existing effort is recognized and given an official version that other commoditized versions can be patterned after. Occasionally a little kick in the pants is necessary to keep people from merely churning out yet another instant-messaging clone, but it's hardly the sort of heavy-handed operation your comment would seem to imply.
Go to the apple store and look around. MacOS X Server isn't being sold anymore. Lots of us already have copies, but if you don't, then you're screwed.
I vaguely remember something on MOSR about this in July. Ah, yes, here it is:
Q: Whither Mac OS X Server?!
I just tried to buy a Mac OS X Server and found out that the software does not run on the new machines. Any idea when these will become available?
Not wanting the press -- or users -- to latch on any further to the fact that Apple does not currently have any shipping operating system capable of Symmetric Multiprocessing (SMP), it has pulled the OS X Server product and is not currently offering any G4 Server products.
Until Mac OS X Public Beta is completed with its built-in SMP support and ships, there is little chance of Apple releasing a SMP-enabled version of OS X Server; the duplication of effort would be excessive. Rather, Apple sources report that a version of Server based on the Public Beta release's codebase will likely be announced at the event where Public Beta is released (presently projected to be Seybold San Francisco in September, although this is not confirmed) and shipped within 8 weeks of the event.
Although the temporary unavailability of OS X Server is a problem for many who are working to adopt OS X's superior server-end capabilities early, the advent of a dramatically improved Server based on the Public Beta code base will be an advantageous one for the platform. Public Beta is faster, stabler, much more user-friendly and feature-rich, and supports Java 1.2 (aka Java2) in addition to its Symmetric Multiprocessing capabilities. This will go a long way toward giving early adopters -- and the industry press -- a truly mature product upon which to base their expectations of the final product
It depends on what you mean by "officially released". With the alpha and beta versions of macos8.5 that folk like me got from apple's developer seeding program, those themes were included until around beta4 IIRC. So my own copies of those files were legitimately obtained from apple with their full knowledge and consent. Others who've since downloaded them from non-apple sites can't say the same.
But what kind of turning radius do you have on that torpedo? If it's doing 200+ knots, then that's prohibitive. Far more likely is that it never got out of the sub to begin with.
Don't grant any new ones, and let the existing ones' terms expire. This is by far the easiest
Don't grant any new ones, and claim eminent domain on all existing ones. That'd require a lot of public funding to avoid a constitutional takings violation, and would effectively foist the burden of existing-patent royalties onto the federal government.
Don't grant any new ones, and pass legislation restricting the use of existing ones. This may raise constitutional issues.
It goes without saying that any of these would be difficult to come by, since not only can individual congressmen not remove their heads from their own asses, in fact Washington DC is itself one enormous ass -- seriously, have you smelled DC in the summer? -- and relocating congress's collective head would require relocating all of congress.
Actually, it's not a gamble at all, precisely because you know that the price/power is always decreasing (except with some commodities like RAM). You just have to be smart enough only to buy as much power as you actually need at the moment, because if you buy extra in advance, you're losing the time value of your money and you're losing the difference between what it cost you when you bought it and what you could pay for it when you finally need it. Yes, it often pays off to pay extra for a box that can be expanded at a future date (eg, with extra slots for that purpose), but that's about as far as you should take it.
The only wrinkle is that people are very poor judges of how much they need, as opposed to how much they merely want.
Hi Scott. Don't forget Seagrams was recently bought out by Vivendi, which got its start as a sewage utility company, which now therefore also owns Universal Studios. So it's finally come full circle: hollywood shit is now being produced by a shit-hauling company. It might also make you think twice about cracking that bottle of rum.
(And this is on topic, since it's precisely these sorts of insane corporate interdependencies that produce irrational behavior like what CNN's exhibited.)
CNN's pretty good about alerting its viewers to Time-Warner's ownership of them when they run a story on Time-Warner. I especially got a chuckle a few months back when CNN reported about Ted Turner's separation from Jane Fonda -- as if it would be news-worthy if Ted didn't own the network.
But can't we work Kevin Bacon into the picture somewhere? It's the fundamental problem with the anti-linking bullshit: there are few parts of the web that you can't get to from another arbitrary starting point.
Slashdot Mirror
The market price for one of these buggers, paid in twenties, should easily approach 450 grams. At least it'll free us up to buy that slimmer wallet we've always wanted.
Actually, I'd be reluctant to call it a Chinese wall. Chinese walls, so named after the Great Wall of China, are an artificially constructed/enforced separation between two groups, preventing all communication between them about certain matters. It's most commonly seen in securities firms, where one department is not allowed to have access to insider information from another department for fear of FTC violations.
Come to think of it, that doesn't sound so far off after all. I'd still go with "clean room", though.
On the plus side, you can't take the pee out of the swimming pool.
- has-been-left-open device, codenamed border collie.
Actually, we've had a lot of success on the piss-removal front, with our enormous dialysis machine. If only we were having as much success with our put-the-cows-back-in-the-barn-after-the-barn-door
Of course there's the other side to this, where people will want to synthesize certain chemcials in opiates or marijuana ... Fun to speculate about, at least!
No kidding. Some day, it'll be feasible for someone to graft a THC gene into his own body so that he basically pisses marijuana. It's already silly for governments to wage war on a naturally occurring feral plant, but how much sillier will it be when it's no longer an external plant but instead one's own body? What'll happen when some enterprising and politically conscious person hacks his own genetic code so as to shit pellets with DeCSS engraved on them? Will his own offspring be contraband?
Keep repainting the manifesto on the side of the barn in the middle of the night. Eventually, you end up with "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."
Using a Microsoft product is like sticking a fork in an outlet. That MSWord should behave this way is revolting but entirely "par for the course".
The force of gravity at the surface of the more massive one would be greater. What would be smaller, however, is the difference in gravity between at the surface and, say, two feet above the surface. That's what tidal forces are about: the slope of the gradient, not the values along the way.
Quite frankly, infinities are well justified in this discussion. We're talking about a singularity, for pete's sake. It's an enormous amount of mass squashed into zero volume -- not just approaching zero, but actually zero. Inside it is where Einstein's equations breakdown and generate infinite lengths for objects having fallen into it. It's a truly peculiar beast.
(Besides, as an aside, you can still have different degrees of infinity. The number of integers is infinitely large but it's still infinitely smaller than the number of irrational numbers.)
Or... tidal forces are much larger around a smaller black hole, could this have anything to do with it?
That was my first knee-jerk thought, but it's silly if you think about it. Tidal forces don't help you pull the matter in any faster. They just make things more painful for the object being sucked in.
Now is not the time to be investing in blackhole IPOs, no matter how tempting their prospects for growth are. The market is simply too unstable.
Black Holes & Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy by Kip Thorne. It goes into enough detail that you won't be left feeling empty, but it's well within the reach of most amateur enthusiasts.
I can't remember the term for it off the top of my head, but as light is emitted by a massive object, it is redshifted a bit, where the amount of redshift corrolates with how massive the object is. Blackholes are merely massive enough to cause an effectively infinite redshift.
They don't have infinite gravity. They just have to have enough mass-->gravity to overcome neutron pressure, about 2.4-2.8 solar masses or so.
There'd be an enormous observable doppler effect. Two blackholes rotating around each other (besides being improbable) would have to revolve at an enormous speed in order to avoid collapsing from their enormous gravitational pulls.
And why are you mentioning special relativity? Special relativity is all about not taking gravity into account, and blackholes are all about gravity.
You're either karma whoring or trolling, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on the former. So let's see...:
Is it just me, or is assuring the quality of open source projects (both in terms of openness and functionality) more or less impossible? I mean, by its nature, open source holds no associations to any governing bodies that carry sway.
Nope, it's just you. There's nothing inherently anti-authoritarian about open-source software (unlike perhaps for how you can make such a case for free software). In fact, open-source software often strictly adheres to the will of one central author who deigns to accept patches from others and folds them into his own project. Linux is perhaps a complicated example, but other projects like Ghostscript illustrate the point.
Industries that market tangible products have no problems creating standardization bureaus and bodies, usually because these sorts of things can be governed in turn by governments, by qualified authorities, by laws.
While this may be true, it's misleading. Standardization bureaus are created all the time in the absence of official government intervention -- they normally go by the name "cartels". If companies can benefit through collusion and can especially marginalize those who do not agree to participate, then they consistently have done so. All you need is a mechanism to keep them from stabbing each other in the back and fragmenting the resulting efforts, and the GPL adequately addresses that problem.
Could the FCC have been created without respected, universally trusted leadership? Doubtful. Who then will take on the challenge of developing an overseer for open-source?
The FCC was created by fiat, not by consensus. Moreover, its purposes --regulating a scarce commodity (spectra) and preventing broadcasters from degrading each other's signals through collision-- make for no remarkable analogy in the software industry.
Software is quickly becoming a commodity, and initiatives like these merely encourage companies to take up an open-source project, rebrand it, and sell it. It's much more like IETF standards in that typically, an existing effort is recognized and given an official version that other commoditized versions can be patterned after. Occasionally a little kick in the pants is necessary to keep people from merely churning out yet another instant-messaging clone, but it's hardly the sort of heavy-handed operation your comment would seem to imply.
I vaguely remember something on MOSR about this in July. Ah, yes, here it is:
It depends on what you mean by "officially released". With the alpha and beta versions of macos8.5 that folk like me got from apple's developer seeding program, those themes were included until around beta4 IIRC. So my own copies of those files were legitimately obtained from apple with their full knowledge and consent. Others who've since downloaded them from non-apple sites can't say the same.
But what kind of turning radius do you have on that torpedo? If it's doing 200+ knots, then that's prohibitive. Far more likely is that it never got out of the sub to begin with.
Don't grant any new ones, and let the existing ones' terms expire. This is by far the easiest
Don't grant any new ones, and claim eminent domain on all existing ones. That'd require a lot of public funding to avoid a constitutional takings violation, and would effectively foist the burden of existing-patent royalties onto the federal government.
Don't grant any new ones, and pass legislation restricting the use of existing ones. This may raise constitutional issues.
It goes without saying that any of these would be difficult to come by, since not only can individual congressmen not remove their heads from their own asses, in fact Washington DC is itself one enormous ass -- seriously, have you smelled DC in the summer? -- and relocating congress's collective head would require relocating all of congress.
Purchasing computer equipment is a gamble.
Actually, it's not a gamble at all, precisely because you know that the price/power is always decreasing (except with some commodities like RAM). You just have to be smart enough only to buy as much power as you actually need at the moment, because if you buy extra in advance, you're losing the time value of your money and you're losing the difference between what it cost you when you bought it and what you could pay for it when you finally need it. Yes, it often pays off to pay extra for a box that can be expanded at a future date (eg, with extra slots for that purpose), but that's about as far as you should take it.
The only wrinkle is that people are very poor judges of how much they need, as opposed to how much they merely want.
It's the obvious choice. It wants you to register, though, and as we all know, registration is the first step towards confiscation. No thank you. ;-)
Hi Scott. Don't forget Seagrams was recently bought out by Vivendi, which got its start as a sewage utility company, which now therefore also owns Universal Studios. So it's finally come full circle: hollywood shit is now being produced by a shit-hauling company. It might also make you think twice about cracking that bottle of rum.
(And this is on topic, since it's precisely these sorts of insane corporate interdependencies that produce irrational behavior like what CNN's exhibited.)
CNN's pretty good about alerting its viewers to Time-Warner's ownership of them when they run a story on Time-Warner. I especially got a chuckle a few months back when CNN reported about Ted Turner's separation from Jane Fonda -- as if it would be news-worthy if Ted didn't own the network.
It's called cynicism, and in this case, it's entirely justified. At this stage of the game, the system has not worked.
But can't we work Kevin Bacon into the picture somewhere? It's the fundamental problem with the anti-linking bullshit: there are few parts of the web that you can't get to from another arbitrary starting point.