Well, while it's easy to say that, it's harder to back it up with flight cash, with research funding for the folks on earth who will plan, research and study the results and oh yeah, you are competing with how many other great ideas to go learn stuff about stuff we don't know about?
There are only so many spaceships that can go up at one time, and while the number is proportional to the funding that the space programs get, it's never going to allow for us to do everything we want.
If you feel very strongly about getting more and more study done, why not petition your local congressmen, ministers and elected officials to spend more on scientific research. Why not look at getting involved and offering your time as a volunteer to do some of the work that could potentially be done by non paid staff. Why not look at getting involved with your local university campus and gather support for a bipartisan effort with other universities to fund a study of something you feel passionate about?
Programmer? Why not offer to write some of the algorithms for them? Scientist? Why not put forward a proposal of what you want to study and why? Businessman? Why not actually offer some level of funding yourself towards a specific research goal? Knuckle-dragger? Why not offer to make make coffees, organize meetings for the others, be a PA to the staff and help out in the cafeteria to bring down costs?
Oh yeah, it's easier to just jump on here and throw out another internet meme.
why isn't this... criminally actionable under peeping Tom laws? Probably other laws too.
Because it was done on a computer. thus laws from the normal world don't apply.
Now that a judge has sided with the rest of the world that uses it's brains to choose right and wrong, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a class action lawsuit pops in. I dare say that many onlookers and also people involved would have been looking at this as a litmus test to see what the judicial reaction is. The judicial system has clearly said "This is a no-no!". As far as I can see, this is a green light for the "Well, you did wrong, now make it right with a bundle of cash" for those with the laptops etc.
* Side note: Stop putting half a sentence in the damned heading and finish it in the body. It's bloody annoying to quote.
What if someone comes driving by with a backhoe, takes your big honking safe with your valuables in it? Just because you can take something doesn't mean it is right or legal to take it.
If someone did that you might THEN be able to argue that your stuff was yours, and that no-one should have nicked it. If it's just lying under a tree and someone picks it up, you can't really complain.
This has all to do with greedy corporations who keep moving towards the "software as a service" paradigm.
Nowadays, a lot of games you "buy" contain only a very small offline playing offering.
I don't have any problems with software as a service. I have subscribed to a LOT of MMOGs. That's perfectly fine in my books. It's a service they give. They keep adding content, I buy an occasional expansion, we carry on happily.
What rubs me the wrong way however, is when a package that isn't actually software as a service is painted to look like one. A normal shooter, with online play, that's not a service. That's what you damn well expect.
With a little luck, these bone heads will eventually learn that doing this sort of thing doesn't pay in the long run. If not, they will slowly flounder while other smarter companies develop and market content that is what it's supposed to be and is marketed as such.
Koller is also confident that consumers will react well to the news - despite the fact that Ubisoft was forced to defend its proposition in the face of angry gamers.
"From our research, this will be received quite positively," he insisted.
They really are completely delusional. What benefit does this provide to the consumers that they'll react positively to? Is there even any theoretical benefit to the consumer?
Maybe the research was done entirely among Sony executives.
It's the oldest story in the book. If you repeat something enough people will eventually believe it. Besides, how often have you seen press statements that don't appear to make any sense at all, but they still play the "Hai, this is what we do" statement. It's sad, but it works in the bigger picture. A lot of investors simply lap that shit up.
I mean, Yahoo and Microsoft of course both suck, but Google needs some legitimate competition in the search market...
How will Yahoo or Microsoft help?
I totally agree. I had a look at Bing to see what the content was like. Sorry, but it's laughable. It is more polarized to finding articles that support MS than it is to finding articles relative to the search. In my opinion, this won't help Microsoft, this will help Yahoo die quicker, which will then just help Google.
Woah, hold up, when did that become a requirement. In no way do I support the methods that the RIAA and their ilk use their lawyers but "satisfaction guaranteed" is a nice slogan but it's never been a necessity of sale. You can return your car if you don't like it but you won't get what you paid for it back.
The difference when buying a car you get to have a look at it, generally a drive around in it. You get to make your choice of satisfaction prior to making the purchase. So you in fact get BETTER than a money refund. If you don't like it, you don't buy it.
If I had the choice of listening to an album before making a purchase, there would be a lot of music I wouldn't have bought over time. Yes, a lot of music stores have that, but if you wander up with 10 cd's that are interesting, the chances of listening to all those is rather slim indeed.
I don't know about the US but in Germany and I think the rest of the EU, the "sweat of the brow" rule applies to databases.
As an SQL programmer, I can vouch for "sweat of the brow" personally. Is there a ruling that DB4 code is worth more than SQL because
of the extra amount of grief that went into debugging it?
Think of it this way: Lets say you complied a database simple atomic numbers, with a nice relationship flow between the tables. It was a good design, optimized space and the queries you were going to run on it. Can you copyright the design of your database? Yes. Can you copyright the final data that comes out of the database? No. What comes out of the database is facts, which now according to this judge (quite surprisingly a show of common sense) but you can certainly keep the rights to how you make your database work.
If so if there is enough heat to keep water in its liquid state, there might be enough power to at least energize simple singe cell-type organisms
Don't confuse water that is liquid due to pressure and water that is liquid due to temperature. Not saying that it's too cold for life, I think you can get water to around -20 celcius without freezing if you put enough pressure on it (after that it forms ice-trhee, five etc.
The jokes on them.
I only test my websites in IE6 (IETester) to see how fucked up they look.
Then I LOL.
Actually, I would have thought a good developer would be trying to make sure that their pages looked exactly as they wanted them in any browser within reason. It's just as wrong to use IE only code that will work only with some of the customer's browsers as expected as it is to write code that the other half of your market won't be able to view or it will look terrible.
"Hey, I heard you're running IE6. You know that's there's an alternative that's safer and free? It's called INTERNET EXPLORER NUMBER #(!&#* 8!!!!!"
Don't be so simplistic. Yes, I know it's free. There is a good chance that most people know it's free. However, things just aren't that simple. I work for a large company based in Australia (around 200k employees) and the SOE here is Win XP, IE6, Office 2002 (Yes, 2002). We have access from our licensing to upgrade to the latest office versions for free, but the real cost would be massive. We can certainly go out and upgrade our SOE to use IE8 which is free, but again the cost would be massive.
A free download doesn't mean there isn't a cost associated with it. You need to take into account all the things like training users (many of which aren't tech savvy) to use the new functions, ensure that all of our intranet which is mainly created in Sharepoint Portal Server 2003 work with the new browser (there is a LOT of rather funky and archaic code running that, which certainly doesn't work in Firefox for example). Oh yeah, what about all the people who suddenly "lose" all their favorites and links to pages they use? Then look into the costs of raising all the problems with helpdesk, managing those, the time it takes to explain to people again how to do something they need to do for their job.
Now, with all that in mind, you can see how it is difficult to convince upper management that upgrading to something with more security rather then spending that same money on developing something else is a tops idea. However, you might just get them more inclined to agree if the government of your country is saying that even their experts are suggesting it's a worthwhile investment of company time and money.
Of course not. That's where US waters are, before they cover up the rest of God's round earth till they hit the other US coastline. Gosh, you clearly didn't do geography at school did you?
I think you're missing the point. If he knew this would happen, he probably wouldn't've done it at all. It was just him venting in a moment of frustration.
How the police responded so quickly is beyond me, though...
Firstly, it implies that the fuzz over in the UK are listening pretty much non stop to Twitter to be able to react so quickly.
Secondly, it implies that they are showing utterly no concept of applying common sense to what they do when they take what is clearly that sort of vent "oh fuck it, I am so sick of this weather!". Seriously guys, use your heads, can anyone really be that pissed at the WEATHER that they blow something up? I doubt it. I really fucking doubt it.
While I am certainly no degree holder or scholar in this field, I often wondered about the following:
A coil of wire with a current running through it emits a magnetic force. From memory, a magnetic force applied to a coil generates a current. Seeing as the earth is covered in a huge magnetic shell, how come people don't actually generate power this way? Is the magnetic field simply too weak compared to what is needed to generate a current of any value?
Perhaps one of you smart folk here might help me out with this little "backburner" thought that I have had for a while?
Complex plasmas may naturally self-organize themselves into stable interacting helical structures that exhibit features normally attributed to organic living matter. The self-organization is based on non-trivial physical mechanisms of plasma interactions involving over-screening of plasma polarization.
Don't you hate it when you start browsing slashdot as part of your morning routine and haven't yet had a coffee and posts like the above read like this:
Spot had a ball. The ball was made of helical structures that exhibit features, Spot lost his plasma interaction. Spot was sad. Spot overscreened plasma polarization.
In most countries which have copyright laws it extends only 50 or so years after the author dies.
Not only that, but it's up to the copyright owner themselves to make the complaint. How on earth does a government "inherit" copyright just because the original owner was from their country? That's like the British government suing anyone who does things based on William Shakespeare because he was English.
Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around, take a picture, send data home, have it processed here, wait, wait, wait.
Yeah, but if you sent a human with enough food and resources for a 3 month mission, what do you reckon the chances are that they will still be around doing the same thing six years later?
Robots might indeed be slower, but on a cost and support basis, they utterly hands down smash any human in a support scenario. Also, the rovers touched down in a module around the size of a small car from memory. Also the support habitat didn't need to move with the robot.
Lastly, why do you think really makes something better just because it's faster? A lot of things take many sets of eyes to notice. The slow "move left, move left" scenario you mentioned allows a multitude of people to look at data while it's moving left. That gives a lot of time for a lot of people to say "No, wait, what's that?". With one person rushing around like a crazed excited scientist, just how much of that do you think will be missed?
Given that it's pretty common knowledge that a) galaxies have big black holes at their centers and b) that galaxies collide... is it really a discovery that black holes will orbit one another as their gravity catches hold of one another?
I mean okay, it's cool to actually have proof of it but I am pretty sure I read about orbiting black holes a while back already. Not to take the icing off the cake here, I am probably more annoyed with the slashdot heading.
Amusingly (Aussie here btw) most of us Aussies would have done the exact same thing, Stinger suits are meh, sure they do help protect from the very rare and occasional sting, but how many pictures do you see of Aussie beaches with the swimmers decked out in ankle and wrist length swimmers?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, while it's easy to say that, it's harder to back it up with flight cash, with research funding for the folks on earth who will plan, research and study the results and oh yeah, you are competing with how many other great ideas to go learn stuff about stuff we don't know about?
There are only so many spaceships that can go up at one time, and while the number is proportional to the funding that the space programs get, it's never going to allow for us to do everything we want.
If you feel very strongly about getting more and more study done, why not petition your local congressmen, ministers and elected officials to spend more on scientific research. Why not look at getting involved and offering your time as a volunteer to do some of the work that could potentially be done by non paid staff. Why not look at getting involved with your local university campus and gather support for a bipartisan effort with other universities to fund a study of something you feel passionate about?
Programmer? Why not offer to write some of the algorithms for them? Scientist? Why not put forward a proposal of what you want to study and why? Businessman? Why not actually offer some level of funding yourself towards a specific research goal? Knuckle-dragger? Why not offer to make make coffees, organize meetings for the others, be a PA to the staff and help out in the cafeteria to bring down costs?
Oh yeah, it's easier to just jump on here and throw out another internet meme.
What about ununbium?
Can't be worse than Unobtainium *gag*.
Thankyou Avatar, for the dumbest name of a substance in movie history.
why isn't this... criminally actionable under peeping Tom laws? Probably other laws too.
Because it was done on a computer. thus laws from the normal world don't apply.
Now that a judge has sided with the rest of the world that uses it's brains to choose right and wrong, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a class action lawsuit pops in. I dare say that many onlookers and also people involved would have been looking at this as a litmus test to see what the judicial reaction is. The judicial system has clearly said "This is a no-no!". As far as I can see, this is a green light for the "Well, you did wrong, now make it right with a bundle of cash" for those with the laptops etc.
* Side note: Stop putting half a sentence in the damned heading and finish it in the body. It's bloody annoying to quote.
reminds me of the time i hacked my friend's fridge for a can of beer when he was out of the room for a moment
Gawd, why did I not see and then mod Funny this utter GEM before I posted.
What if someone comes driving by with a backhoe, takes your big honking safe with your valuables in it? Just because you can take something doesn't mean it is right or legal to take it.
If someone did that you might THEN be able to argue that your stuff was yours, and that no-one should have nicked it. If it's just lying under a tree and someone picks it up, you can't really complain.
This has all to do with greedy corporations who keep moving towards the "software as a service" paradigm. Nowadays, a lot of games you "buy" contain only a very small offline playing offering.
I don't have any problems with software as a service. I have subscribed to a LOT of MMOGs. That's perfectly fine in my books. It's a service they give. They keep adding content, I buy an occasional expansion, we carry on happily.
What rubs me the wrong way however, is when a package that isn't actually software as a service is painted to look like one. A normal shooter, with online play, that's not a service. That's what you damn well expect.
With a little luck, these bone heads will eventually learn that doing this sort of thing doesn't pay in the long run. If not, they will slowly flounder while other smarter companies develop and market content that is what it's supposed to be and is marketed as such.
They really are completely delusional. What benefit does this provide to the consumers that they'll react positively to? Is there even any theoretical benefit to the consumer? Maybe the research was done entirely among Sony executives.
It's the oldest story in the book. If you repeat something enough people will eventually believe it. Besides, how often have you seen press statements that don't appear to make any sense at all, but they still play the "Hai, this is what we do" statement. It's sad, but it works in the bigger picture. A lot of investors simply lap that shit up.
I mean, Yahoo and Microsoft of course both suck, but Google needs some legitimate competition in the search market...
How will Yahoo or Microsoft help?
I totally agree. I had a look at Bing to see what the content was like. Sorry, but it's laughable. It is more polarized to finding articles that support MS than it is to finding articles relative to the search. In my opinion, this won't help Microsoft, this will help Yahoo die quicker, which will then just help Google.
Woah, hold up, when did that become a requirement. In no way do I support the methods that the RIAA and their ilk use their lawyers but "satisfaction guaranteed" is a nice slogan but it's never been a necessity of sale. You can return your car if you don't like it but you won't get what you paid for it back.
The difference when buying a car you get to have a look at it, generally a drive around in it. You get to make your choice of satisfaction prior to making the purchase. So you in fact get BETTER than a money refund. If you don't like it, you don't buy it.
If I had the choice of listening to an album before making a purchase, there would be a lot of music I wouldn't have bought over time. Yes, a lot of music stores have that, but if you wander up with 10 cd's that are interesting, the chances of listening to all those is rather slim indeed.
Ever heard about reinarnation?
Is that there you are inarnated? No, never heard of that, can you explain it in a little more detail?
I don't know about the US but in Germany and I think the rest of the EU, the "sweat of the brow" rule applies to databases.
As an SQL programmer, I can vouch for "sweat of the brow" personally. Is there a ruling that DB4 code is worth more than SQL because of the extra amount of grief that went into debugging it?
Think of it this way: Lets say you complied a database simple atomic numbers, with a nice relationship flow between the tables. It was a good design, optimized space and the queries you were going to run on it. Can you copyright the design of your database? Yes. Can you copyright the final data that comes out of the database? No. What comes out of the database is facts, which now according to this judge (quite surprisingly a show of common sense) but you can certainly keep the rights to how you make your database work.
If so if there is enough heat to keep water in its liquid state, there might be enough power to at least energize simple singe cell-type organisms
Don't confuse water that is liquid due to pressure and water that is liquid due to temperature. Not saying that it's too cold for life, I think you can get water to around -20 celcius without freezing if you put enough pressure on it (after that it forms ice-trhee, five etc.
You can get some more info on this here and here.
another old wrinkly dinosaur doesn't like change! news at 11 on FOX!.
There, fixed that for you.
The youtube video should be linked in the summary.
Mod this Anon Post up. It's at 0 now and it's amazingly informative.
The jokes on them. I only test my websites in IE6 (IETester) to see how fucked up they look. Then I LOL.
Actually, I would have thought a good developer would be trying to make sure that their pages looked exactly as they wanted them in any browser within reason. It's just as wrong to use IE only code that will work only with some of the customer's browsers as expected as it is to write code that the other half of your market won't be able to view or it will look terrible.
"Hey, I heard you're running IE6. You know that's there's an alternative that's safer and free? It's called INTERNET EXPLORER NUMBER #(!&#* 8!!!!!"
Don't be so simplistic. Yes, I know it's free. There is a good chance that most people know it's free. However, things just aren't that simple. I work for a large company based in Australia (around 200k employees) and the SOE here is Win XP, IE6, Office 2002 (Yes, 2002). We have access from our licensing to upgrade to the latest office versions for free, but the real cost would be massive. We can certainly go out and upgrade our SOE to use IE8 which is free, but again the cost would be massive.
A free download doesn't mean there isn't a cost associated with it. You need to take into account all the things like training users (many of which aren't tech savvy) to use the new functions, ensure that all of our intranet which is mainly created in Sharepoint Portal Server 2003 work with the new browser (there is a LOT of rather funky and archaic code running that, which certainly doesn't work in Firefox for example). Oh yeah, what about all the people who suddenly "lose" all their favorites and links to pages they use? Then look into the costs of raising all the problems with helpdesk, managing those, the time it takes to explain to people again how to do something they need to do for their job.
Now, with all that in mind, you can see how it is difficult to convince upper management that upgrading to something with more security rather then spending that same money on developing something else is a tops idea. However, you might just get them more inclined to agree if the government of your country is saying that even their experts are suggesting it's a worthwhile investment of company time and money.
The world doesn't end at America's coastlines.
Of course not. That's where US waters are, before they cover up the rest of God's round earth till they hit the other US coastline. Gosh, you clearly didn't do geography at school did you?
*rolls eyes*
I think you're missing the point. If he knew this would happen, he probably wouldn't've done it at all. It was just him venting in a moment of frustration.
How the police responded so quickly is beyond me, though...
Firstly, it implies that the fuzz over in the UK are listening pretty much non stop to Twitter to be able to react so quickly.
Secondly, it implies that they are showing utterly no concept of applying common sense to what they do when they take what is clearly that sort of vent "oh fuck it, I am so sick of this weather!". Seriously guys, use your heads, can anyone really be that pissed at the WEATHER that they blow something up? I doubt it. I really fucking doubt it.
While I am certainly no degree holder or scholar in this field, I often wondered about the following:
A coil of wire with a current running through it emits a magnetic force. From memory, a magnetic force applied to a coil generates a current. Seeing as the earth is covered in a huge magnetic shell, how come people don't actually generate power this way? Is the magnetic field simply too weak compared to what is needed to generate a current of any value?
Perhaps one of you smart folk here might help me out with this little "backburner" thought that I have had for a while?
Much appreciated,
- Fluffeh
Complex plasmas may naturally self-organize themselves into stable interacting helical structures that exhibit features normally attributed to organic living matter. The self-organization is based on non-trivial physical mechanisms of plasma interactions involving over-screening of plasma polarization.
Don't you hate it when you start browsing slashdot as part of your morning routine and haven't yet had a coffee and posts like the above read like this:
Spot had a ball. The ball was made of helical structures that exhibit features, Spot lost his plasma interaction. Spot was sad. Spot overscreened plasma polarization.
Now, off to get that coffee and have another go.
In most countries which have copyright laws it extends only 50 or so years after the author dies.
Not only that, but it's up to the copyright owner themselves to make the complaint. How on earth does a government "inherit" copyright just because the original owner was from their country? That's like the British government suing anyone who does things based on William Shakespeare because he was English.
Now compare that to an incredibly slow robot that has to inch around, take a picture, send data home, have it processed here, wait, wait, wait.
Yeah, but if you sent a human with enough food and resources for a 3 month mission, what do you reckon the chances are that they will still be around doing the same thing six years later?
Robots might indeed be slower, but on a cost and support basis, they utterly hands down smash any human in a support scenario. Also, the rovers touched down in a module around the size of a small car from memory. Also the support habitat didn't need to move with the robot.
Lastly, why do you think really makes something better just because it's faster? A lot of things take many sets of eyes to notice. The slow "move left, move left" scenario you mentioned allows a multitude of people to look at data while it's moving left. That gives a lot of time for a lot of people to say "No, wait, what's that?". With one person rushing around like a crazed excited scientist, just how much of that do you think will be missed?
Given that it's pretty common knowledge that a) galaxies have big black holes at their centers and b) that galaxies collide... is it really a discovery that black holes will orbit one another as their gravity catches hold of one another?
I mean okay, it's cool to actually have proof of it but I am pretty sure I read about orbiting black holes a while back already. Not to take the icing off the cake here, I am probably more annoyed with the slashdot heading.
Amusingly (Aussie here btw) most of us Aussies would have done the exact same thing, Stinger suits are meh, sure they do help protect from the very rare and occasional sting, but how many pictures do you see of Aussie beaches with the swimmers decked out in ankle and wrist length swimmers?
Somewhere on efuct (or whatever the spelling of the site is). Funny as hell.