All those other companies gave no illusion of being secure. Hell, they often had in their own terms and services that they would be reading your email for whatever purposes they desired. Kim Dotcom claims to be offering secure, encrypted services, yet anyone with a basic understanding of computer security can tell he's just putting up a facade for the masses. That's why he cannot be trusted. He's nothing but a blowhard.
That's because mplayer, libavcodec, and x264 aren't selling a product. Getting them off the market does the MPEG-LA no good. On the other hand, with Google wants to incorporate x264 into their own products like Youtube, they better get a license. Additionally, allowing such groups to implement their technology without requiring a license means there's less reason to implement new independent standards, and thus less market competition for MPEG-LA. It's the same idea as the rumor that Adobe dumped Photoshop on file sharing networks themselves.
That's not to say issues haven't sprung up in the past. I know on at least one project, there was an over-zealous lawyer/aide/whatever who sent out a cease and desist notice, followed by some panicking in the project, and a retraction and apology a few weeks later.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to argue for or against Helium-3 mining. I'm merely bringing evidence and reason to the OP's claim that Milligan is a fool to be ignored. Philosophy professors should not be held as authorities of physical sciences, and should leave that up to those who have at least a basic understanding of it.
Sure I can. Computing is one of the rare things that has experienced exponential growth for considerable time. Meanwhile, power consumption has plateaued in developed countries for decades. Even population growth in developed countries has been trending toward zero, so you can't use that as an indicator either. We're not going to see a significant increase in consumption without a radical change in society, such as a massive space-borne industry capable of mining the Moon, and of course then the power consumption will be in space, leaving Earth unaffected by the increased heat output.
Assuming helium mining would ever be economical in the first place, having to cart that soil to a central processing plant to extract the few parts per billion of the stuff would eat up whatever net energy you might hope to gain. All processing would need to be done in-place.
Chew says that VP8 will be able to deliver HD video to up to 10 people at a time, which is something H.264 couldn't handle.
What are you talking about? Neither VP8 nor H264 can handle that, because they're not fucking communications protocols. They're video codecs. Video codecs don't deliver anything to anyone. They just store video.
The helium they would be mining is on the order of parts per billion. It's not like they're going to ship large volumes of soil somewhere for processing. That's pointlessly inefficient. They would have large excavators that would process out the helium internally, and put the soil right back where it got it as it's crawling along the surface. It would not be altering the landscape in a manner we could see from a quarter million miles away.
Power consumption in the first world has largely plateaued over the past several decades. We're doing more and more, but we're also doing it more and more efficiently. Once the rest of the world develops, it's going to plateau at a similar location, and will grow geometrically with population size from there.
In order to effectively mine helium for fuel, we're going to have to have a massive space-fairing industry. Such a thing would cause a large increase in our per-capita power consumption, but at the same time, that power is going to be consumed somewhere other than Earth, so the effect of that increased power consumption on Earth would be zero.
It's not like pit mines here on Earth. You're not cutting into a rich vein of material. You're scooping up a few meters of soil, extracting an amount of helium in it measured in parts per billion, and discarding the rest of it right back where you got it.
More like, by the time our worldwide power consumption increases beyond ten fold from its current value, a substantial percentage of us will be somewhere else.
We're talking parts per billion in the first couple meters of soil. We could mine the entire surface of the Moon, and still remove only an inconsequential amount of mass from it.
The highest per-capita energy usage in the world is around 22kW. Most "first world" countries are between 5-10kW. Bringing the entire world's population up to that 22kW value would only be around 150TW. By comparison, the total input energy from the Sun is around 175PW. If we used 10000x as much energy as we do now, it certain would be bad, but that's such an absurd amount of power consumption, it's not even worth worrying about.
Environmental objections... What environment? It's the god damned Moon. It's a lifeless near-vacuum.
Cultural objections... Culture has admired the Moon from afar. Helium-3 mining collects helium produced by billions of years of bombardment from solar wind. That means it only exists on the surface. You're not going to notice any difference between today's Moon, and a Moon mined of its helium.
Too much access to energy would be bad... Seriously, just go fuck off.
Seriously, every other news outlet has already gotten this wrong, but I expected better from Slashdot. A hologram is an application of phased array optics. You have a 2D surface. That surface contains a series of seemingly arbitrary fields of light and dark. Those fields, when illuminated with a coherent light source (like a LASER), produce an interference pattern which reproduces the light field emanating from a 3D object as it passes through that 2D surface. In essence, it creates a window through which you can view true 3D. That shit in Iron Man, with images floating in air... that's not a hologram.
For the types of positions typically occupied by union employees, job performance usually is that simple to measure. However, union contracts and seniority rules are specifically set up to ignore individual performance.
The idea that you can make people produce more by simply telling them they'll get paid more if they work harder involves a whole slew of assumptions which rarely apply, esp. in a modern workplace.
On the other hand, the lack of any retribution for working less hard means there are a whole lot of people who will abuse the system, and work less hard.
Slashdot Mirror
All those other companies gave no illusion of being secure. Hell, they often had in their own terms and services that they would be reading your email for whatever purposes they desired. Kim Dotcom claims to be offering secure, encrypted services, yet anyone with a basic understanding of computer security can tell he's just putting up a facade for the masses. That's why he cannot be trusted. He's nothing but a blowhard.
So does this mean the watchers are watching themselves?
That's because mplayer, libavcodec, and x264 aren't selling a product. Getting them off the market does the MPEG-LA no good. On the other hand, with Google wants to incorporate x264 into their own products like Youtube, they better get a license. Additionally, allowing such groups to implement their technology without requiring a license means there's less reason to implement new independent standards, and thus less market competition for MPEG-LA. It's the same idea as the rumor that Adobe dumped Photoshop on file sharing networks themselves.
That's not to say issues haven't sprung up in the past. I know on at least one project, there was an over-zealous lawyer/aide/whatever who sent out a cease and desist notice, followed by some panicking in the project, and a retraction and apology a few weeks later.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to argue for or against Helium-3 mining. I'm merely bringing evidence and reason to the OP's claim that Milligan is a fool to be ignored. Philosophy professors should not be held as authorities of physical sciences, and should leave that up to those who have at least a basic understanding of it.
Sure I can. Computing is one of the rare things that has experienced exponential growth for considerable time. Meanwhile, power consumption has plateaued in developed countries for decades. Even population growth in developed countries has been trending toward zero, so you can't use that as an indicator either. We're not going to see a significant increase in consumption without a radical change in society, such as a massive space-borne industry capable of mining the Moon, and of course then the power consumption will be in space, leaving Earth unaffected by the increased heat output.
Assuming helium mining would ever be economical in the first place, having to cart that soil to a central processing plant to extract the few parts per billion of the stuff would eat up whatever net energy you might hope to gain. All processing would need to be done in-place.
That's really shitty. I'm glad I don't use facebook.
You scrape up the top soil, process it in place, and put it right back where you found it, minus a very small fraction of helium. There is no change.
As always, if you didn't like what they were doing, why did you go there?
Chew says that VP8 will be able to deliver HD video to up to 10 people at a time, which is something H.264 couldn't handle.
What are you talking about? Neither VP8 nor H264 can handle that, because they're not fucking communications protocols. They're video codecs. Video codecs don't deliver anything to anyone. They just store video.
Very few things ever created by man have seen exponential growth. Power generation/consumption is not one of them.
The helium they would be mining is on the order of parts per billion. It's not like they're going to ship large volumes of soil somewhere for processing. That's pointlessly inefficient. They would have large excavators that would process out the helium internally, and put the soil right back where it got it as it's crawling along the surface. It would not be altering the landscape in a manner we could see from a quarter million miles away.
Power consumption in the first world has largely plateaued over the past several decades. We're doing more and more, but we're also doing it more and more efficiently. Once the rest of the world develops, it's going to plateau at a similar location, and will grow geometrically with population size from there.
In order to effectively mine helium for fuel, we're going to have to have a massive space-fairing industry. Such a thing would cause a large increase in our per-capita power consumption, but at the same time, that power is going to be consumed somewhere other than Earth, so the effect of that increased power consumption on Earth would be zero.
It's not like pit mines here on Earth. You're not cutting into a rich vein of material. You're scooping up a few meters of soil, extracting an amount of helium in it measured in parts per billion, and discarding the rest of it right back where you got it.
More like, by the time our worldwide power consumption increases beyond ten fold from its current value, a substantial percentage of us will be somewhere else.
We're talking parts per billion in the first couple meters of soil. We could mine the entire surface of the Moon, and still remove only an inconsequential amount of mass from it.
The highest per-capita energy usage in the world is around 22kW. Most "first world" countries are between 5-10kW. Bringing the entire world's population up to that 22kW value would only be around 150TW. By comparison, the total input energy from the Sun is around 175PW. If we used 10000x as much energy as we do now, it certain would be bad, but that's such an absurd amount of power consumption, it's not even worth worrying about.
Presumably we would have that little detail figured out by the time we would be in a position to do large scale mining on the moon.
Environmental objections... What environment? It's the god damned Moon. It's a lifeless near-vacuum.
Cultural objections... Culture has admired the Moon from afar. Helium-3 mining collects helium produced by billions of years of bombardment from solar wind. That means it only exists on the surface. You're not going to notice any difference between today's Moon, and a Moon mined of its helium.
Too much access to energy would be bad... Seriously, just go fuck off.
In other words, they've decided the sender would be liable if a set of circumstances that could never be proven in court were met.
To be fair, when a lactose intolerant person drinks milk, everyone in the vicinity loses.
"Mange" means eat
I thought mange was some parasite dogs got.
Seriously, every other news outlet has already gotten this wrong, but I expected better from Slashdot. A hologram is an application of phased array optics. You have a 2D surface. That surface contains a series of seemingly arbitrary fields of light and dark. Those fields, when illuminated with a coherent light source (like a LASER), produce an interference pattern which reproduces the light field emanating from a 3D object as it passes through that 2D surface. In essence, it creates a window through which you can view true 3D. That shit in Iron Man, with images floating in air... that's not a hologram.
Rarely is job performance so simple to measure.
For the types of positions typically occupied by union employees, job performance usually is that simple to measure. However, union contracts and seniority rules are specifically set up to ignore individual performance.
The idea that you can make people produce more by simply telling them they'll get paid more if they work harder involves a whole slew of assumptions which rarely apply, esp. in a modern workplace.
On the other hand, the lack of any retribution for working less hard means there are a whole lot of people who will abuse the system, and work less hard.
But you're not associating with them. You're associating with the company, and they're independently associating with the company.