A Kazakh cosmonaut would fly to the space station in the fall of this year under the terms of a commercial deal with Kazakhstan's government, Perminov said.
If people continue to pay high prices for shit service then where is the motivation to improve the infrastructure?
To beat out the competition, of course.
It might not have been feasible to improve the infrastructure with wired connections, but with Cell Towers, most people are going to go with the service that gives the most bars. -I- switched after I noticed all my friends getting full reception in my neighborhood while I constantly went in and out of signal.
On the first page, I just open up tabs of all of the other pages. By the time I'm done with page 2, all of the other pages have loaded and I can cycle through them just as quickly as I could through a slideshow.
It applies here. The article claims that people who download music and movies tend to buy more music and movies than those who do not download.
Perhaps the link is simply that the people who download music and movies are the ones who _like_ music and movies. The real question is "How much would these same people be buying if piracy were not an option?"
The article is also full of the same generalities and excuses that pirates love to make, from "Lots of people are just trying it" to "People who pirate music probably go to more concerts and probably buy more merchandise."
Some people think that the only way to truly determine the effects of filesharing on media purchase would be to perform a significant number of intrusive case studies to see how filesharing availability has affected individual spending over time... but that's not really true. All you need to do is analyze the overall market and look at the filesharing trends vs. the market economy.
We -know- that file sharing is bad for big record labels, but is it bad for the economy as a whole? I don't think we know, yet. I hoped this article would present some kind of study with a definitive answer, but all I see is a rehashing of the same tired, fallacy-ridden arguments... except this time in Dutch.
Try doing it after hanging upside down for more than a half-hour.
Again, it's not impossible to get an erection in these circumstances... just -really- difficult.
Yes, people -have- had sex in space, but it's almost impossible without straps to keep yourself in place and a really high drive that will overcome all of the other problems.
From what I understand, it's almost impossible for people to have sex in Zero-G. Male Astronauts have apparently tried quite a bit, even with the help of drugs, but they -can't- get an erection.
This makes sense since most of the blood in your body flows to your head when you're in Zero-G.
According to the article, 3 cups of coffee makes me three times more likely to experience hallucinations than if I had no cups of coffee.
Well, I'm pretty sure that my chances of hallucinating on No Cups of coffee are nearly Zilch... let's say.001% just for giggles. So three times that is.003%... big deal. Indeed the article even mentions that -maybe- 10% of all people will "hear voices" at some point throughout their lives.
The most profound thing I got out of the article is the fact that if you are already prone to hallucinations, Caffeine will make it worse. That doesn't surprise me, but I guess it's nice to have some data to back it up.
1) The article states that Silkworms seem to be the most compact form of Human-edible food. 1kg of Silkworm Meat will give you far more nutrients and proteins than 1kg of Chicken meat.
2) For a long-term space mission, (we're talking at -least- decades from now) you would need a renewable food source that ultimately converts solar energy into consumable chemical energy, since Humans can't eat sunlight. So futuristic Arcology-like spaceships might have greenhouses to harness solar energy, and astronauts could eat grown food. However, even Vegans need vitamin supplements and the article states that for protein and nutrient purposes, Silkworms make a great compact, efficient, renewable food source.
...each astronaut would need to consume 170 silkworm pupae and cocoons a day to fulfill their animal protein needs. That number might be difficult to raise on a cramped spaceship but could be more feasible than raising an equivalent number of chickens.
I guess I took it for granted that 170 silkworms would be easier to raise than 170 chickens.
I just played your company's game on the Gaza situation. Very neat and interesting, although I found myself wishing it were -more- interactive. I read through all of the Points of Interest and Leading Roles because I felt like it was part of some kind of RPG that I was about to influence. Well done.
When the choice came to "Select a Role," I was thrilled. I was even more thrilled when I was asked on how to proceed. "I wonder what the consequences of my actions will be..."
But then the game ended and I was suddenly looking at a poll result. I realized that I had just influenced the poll myself, by ordering what I thought were 'my' virtual Hamas troops to engage the IDF with maximum violence. And instead of seeing the results of my actions, now one more percentile of your poll shows that someone thinks the Hamas should indiscriminately attack Israel.
...but I really prefer my news to be reported in text and pictures. The occasional Flash apps that BBC sometimes uses to explore stories feel slow and clunky. Information osmosis time is limited to the speed and pace of the program, whereas reading a text article is limited only by the user's ability to scan through it, which can be done at their leisure.
I feel like I am in the majority when I say that most of my news-reading comes during work during the few minutes I get every hour or so when waiting on something (like a compile). I don't really have the time to tinker around with a simulation exploring the possibilities. And even if I did, my patience will likely wear thin unless the simulation is either really exciting (not the case in the article) or something I'm really interested in (also not the case in the article).
Yes, it's kinda cool. But changing the face of modern journalism? I think not.
How much smaller can they make the iPhone while still retaining the trademark touchscreen applications?
The appeal of the iPhone is that you can do anything with it... it's an iPod, a phone, a browser, a gameboy, a GPS, etc. Making it even half as small is going to severely hamper a lot of this functionality. Who wants a browser with even less screen size than the current iPhone? What games could you play on a screen that small? How would you be able to use it as a TomTom when the screen size is no larger than a pack of matches?
This is to say nothing of how difficult it would be to control such a tiny interface with the already inaccurate touchscreen.
The somewhat impressive "shadows" of hands seemed laggy and awkward, while it appeared that you actually have to already be touching the back of the smaller device to see where your finger is.
Really? The underground science facility I work at over at Black Mesa is more productive than ever. In fact, we're boosting the antimass spectrometer to 105% for a big test tomorrow.
While I agree entirely with everything that you say, but not with your unstated conclusion. Are you trying to say that because Artists have never had the guarantee of being able to make living on the basis of their art, we should allow other people to circumvent a system that makes this a possibility?
Yes, artists aren't -guaranteed- the same income security as someone with a steady job, but the fact remains that many artists and authors can and do make their money off of their music or their books... some even strike it rich. The argument in your parent is that, for good or ill, this is being threatened by Piracy.
Agreed, that in a capitalist system, nobody is guaranteed a job based on what they do best (or a job at all) but if someone is willing to pay a Parcheesi player $100,000/yr to watch him play and make videos of it, than so be it. When someone -else- comes along making copies of these Parcheesi videos and selling/distributing them, it is -not- just a sad fact of existence that you should shrug your shoulders and say "Well, it happens." It's crime, it can be stopped, and when everyone faces the honest truth and acknowledges this, they'll all be a lot happier.
Slashdot Mirror
A Kazakh cosmonaut would fly to the space station in the fall of this year under the terms of a commercial deal with Kazakhstan's government, Perminov said.
Very Ni-ice.
So much for my dream of posting from space.
If people continue to pay high prices for shit service then where is the motivation to improve the infrastructure?
To beat out the competition, of course.
It might not have been feasible to improve the infrastructure with wired connections, but with Cell Towers, most people are going to go with the service that gives the most bars. -I- switched after I noticed all my friends getting full reception in my neighborhood while I constantly went in and out of signal.
I think my joke went over everyones head. :-\
>That's exactly what a couple of US researchers have done for physics papers published by the American Physical Society since 1893
I wasn't aware that Google's PageRank existed in 1893.
On the first page, I just open up tabs of all of the other pages. By the time I'm done with page 2, all of the other pages have loaded and I can cycle through them just as quickly as I could through a slideshow.
It applies here. The article claims that people who download music and movies tend to buy more music and movies than those who do not download.
Perhaps the link is simply that the people who download music and movies are the ones who _like_ music and movies. The real question is "How much would these same people be buying if piracy were not an option?"
The article is also full of the same generalities and excuses that pirates love to make, from "Lots of people are just trying it" to "People who pirate music probably go to more concerts and probably buy more merchandise."
Some people think that the only way to truly determine the effects of filesharing on media purchase would be to perform a significant number of intrusive case studies to see how filesharing availability has affected individual spending over time... but that's not really true. All you need to do is analyze the overall market and look at the filesharing trends vs. the market economy.
We -know- that file sharing is bad for big record labels, but is it bad for the economy as a whole? I don't think we know, yet. I hoped this article would present some kind of study with a definitive answer, but all I see is a rehashing of the same tired, fallacy-ridden arguments... except this time in Dutch.
Try doing it after hanging upside down for more than a half-hour.
Again, it's not impossible to get an erection in these circumstances... just -really- difficult.
Yes, people -have- had sex in space, but it's almost impossible without straps to keep yourself in place and a really high drive that will overcome all of the other problems.
"Congressmen, YouTube is a series of Tubes..."
From what I understand, it's almost impossible for people to have sex in Zero-G. Male Astronauts have apparently tried quite a bit, even with the help of drugs, but they -can't- get an erection.
This makes sense since most of the blood in your body flows to your head when you're in Zero-G.
Sorry to burst all of your geeky dreams.
According to the article, 3 cups of coffee makes me three times more likely to experience hallucinations than if I had no cups of coffee.
.001% just for giggles. So three times that is .003%... big deal. Indeed the article even mentions that -maybe- 10% of all people will "hear voices" at some point throughout their lives.
Well, I'm pretty sure that my chances of hallucinating on No Cups of coffee are nearly Zilch... let's say
The most profound thing I got out of the article is the fact that if you are already prone to hallucinations, Caffeine will make it worse. That doesn't surprise me, but I guess it's nice to have some data to back it up.
Several points:
1) The article states that Silkworms seem to be the most compact form of Human-edible food. 1kg of Silkworm Meat will give you far more nutrients and proteins than 1kg of Chicken meat.
2) For a long-term space mission, (we're talking at -least- decades from now) you would need a renewable food source that ultimately converts solar energy into consumable chemical energy, since Humans can't eat sunlight. So futuristic Arcology-like spaceships might have greenhouses to harness solar energy, and astronauts could eat grown food. However, even Vegans need vitamin supplements and the article states that for protein and nutrient purposes, Silkworms make a great compact, efficient, renewable food source.
I guess I took it for granted that 170 silkworms would be easier to raise than 170 chickens.
I can see the paranoid parents who would react to this in a knee-jerk manner having a major brain fart right now.
...
"I need to take Halo away from him so he won't turn into a murderer!"
"But if I take Halo away from him, he might become a murderer!"
I just played your company's game on the Gaza situation. Very neat and interesting, although I found myself wishing it were -more- interactive. I read through all of the Points of Interest and Leading Roles because I felt like it was part of some kind of RPG that I was about to influence. Well done.
:)
When the choice came to "Select a Role," I was thrilled. I was even more thrilled when I was asked on how to proceed. "I wonder what the consequences of my actions will be..."
But then the game ended and I was suddenly looking at a poll result. I realized that I had just influenced the poll myself, by ordering what I thought were 'my' virtual Hamas troops to engage the IDF with maximum violence. And instead of seeing the results of my actions, now one more percentile of your poll shows that someone thinks the Hamas should indiscriminately attack Israel.
Just thought you'd appreciate the feedback.
...but I really prefer my news to be reported in text and pictures. The occasional Flash apps that BBC sometimes uses to explore stories feel slow and clunky. Information osmosis time is limited to the speed and pace of the program, whereas reading a text article is limited only by the user's ability to scan through it, which can be done at their leisure.
I feel like I am in the majority when I say that most of my news-reading comes during work during the few minutes I get every hour or so when waiting on something (like a compile). I don't really have the time to tinker around with a simulation exploring the possibilities. And even if I did, my patience will likely wear thin unless the simulation is either really exciting (not the case in the article) or something I'm really interested in (also not the case in the article).
Yes, it's kinda cool. But changing the face of modern journalism? I think not.
How much smaller can they make the iPhone while still retaining the trademark touchscreen applications?
The appeal of the iPhone is that you can do anything with it... it's an iPod, a phone, a browser, a gameboy, a GPS, etc. Making it even half as small is going to severely hamper a lot of this functionality. Who wants a browser with even less screen size than the current iPhone? What games could you play on a screen that small? How would you be able to use it as a TomTom when the screen size is no larger than a pack of matches?
This is to say nothing of how difficult it would be to control such a tiny interface with the already inaccurate touchscreen.
This article puts the lie to that notion, this one guy made a stove instead of a rocket.
Yes, but history has shown that stoves are just as capable of killing Jews as rockets are.
The somewhat impressive "shadows" of hands seemed laggy and awkward, while it appeared that you actually have to already be touching the back of the smaller device to see where your finger is.
I suppose it's a step towards the future, though.
Really? The underground science facility I work at over at Black Mesa is more productive than ever. In fact, we're boosting the antimass spectrometer to 105% for a big test tomorrow.
While I agree entirely with everything that you say, but not with your unstated conclusion. Are you trying to say that because Artists have never had the guarantee of being able to make living on the basis of their art, we should allow other people to circumvent a system that makes this a possibility? Yes, artists aren't -guaranteed- the same income security as someone with a steady job, but the fact remains that many artists and authors can and do make their money off of their music or their books... some even strike it rich. The argument in your parent is that, for good or ill, this is being threatened by Piracy. Agreed, that in a capitalist system, nobody is guaranteed a job based on what they do best (or a job at all) but if someone is willing to pay a Parcheesi player $100,000/yr to watch him play and make videos of it, than so be it. When someone -else- comes along making copies of these Parcheesi videos and selling/distributing them, it is -not- just a sad fact of existence that you should shrug your shoulders and say "Well, it happens." It's crime, it can be stopped, and when everyone faces the honest truth and acknowledges this, they'll all be a lot happier.