That's absurd. Men don't need to throw away their entire career to have a family. Why should women? This bias, though natural in origin, needs to be corrected. We are allowing there to be a massive road block between half of the world's population and a career in science, and in the same breath complaining that not enough people are pursuing careers in science.
Studies have shown that couples who DON'T have children are, on average, significantly happier.
Yeah, you're REALLY gonna need to cite that. I know of not a single person who, in the twilight years of their lives, have looked back and said, "Ya know, having kids was a complete waste of my time."
You may be happier for a few years, but if your last decades are spent wishing you had a family, are you really happier overall?
We have. Other countries have not. Many third world nations are developing nukes precisely because they're seen as a necessary indicator of power.
The more countries have nukes, the more likely it is that they get used, either by a state, or by an independent group which somehow got its hands on one of the weapons.
Do you really feel safer with God only knows how many nukes floating around Pakistan? And what about when Iran gets them? And after them, who's next?
My six year old laptop can run Windows 7 acceptably. It's not fast, but it's good enough to be usable for email, web-browsing, even YouTube videos. Therefore, I'd expect W7 to run fine on netbooks.
That said, there's the question of why you'd want it on a netbook. It's different enough from previous versions of the OS that your grandma would probably prefer to just use XP, like she has been for years. And if the user is willing to accept a change, why pay for W7 when you can use some form of Linux, custom tailored for netbooks?
The main draw of Windows is compatibility with all the apps out there. Netbooks aren't going to be running those apps, so why bother with Windows?
What is this "as if IP has real meaning beyond your own mindset, as if it is a part of reality that exists outside of you political environment" nonsense?
Of COURSE it has a real meaning. It's not a propaganda term! That phrase has been around for well over a century!!
And it absolutely has meaning in China. They're a member of WIPO! They've signed treaties! Do you know anything about the issue!?
But, of course, since you're raging against evil "imaginary" property (that one actually IS a propaganda term, btw), you will of course be modded up. This is/., after all.
How? How on Earth would you get paid for your work on an invention, if anyone could take it and produce it without paying you a dime?
Researchers at a university? Gone. Fabless microchip companies? Forget 'em. DRM? It'll be everywhere, since it will be the only form of protection to exist.
This is the absolute WORST idea I've seen in quite some time.
the research products almost never make it to real products that people can use
You could say the same for just about any real research. I'm still grateful that it's being done. Far too many companies are content to focus on the next quarter while leaving the research to academia.
Every time the Sun has set, it has risen. The Sun set a few hours ago for me, yet I'm confident that it will rise again.
I don't need a deductive proof to know it.
Or another example, if I flip a coin and have it land heads 100 times in a row, I can be pretty confident that if I flip it again, it will land on heads again. "Gamblers' Fallacy!" you might mistakenly claim. But it's not... the odds a of a fair coin landing on heads a hundred times in a row are on the order of 1 in 10^30. More likely, I have found a biased coin.
To consider your "gulp of saltwater at the ocean" example, you are thinking only of an isolated incident. That doesn't make a pattern. Now, if you swallowed a mouthful of saltwater every single time you went to the beach, twenty times in a row, then yes, I'd say it's likely that you will swallow yet another on your 21st visit.
Deductive logic is great for mathematicians. For everything else, inductive logic is our best tool.
I believe that the slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy in most cases. (To implement laws that you don't want through what? Political momentum?)
The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy only when it's used as deductive reasoning. But when you apply inductive reasoning, which is arguably much more applicable to politics, the slippery slope holds up nicely.
Every time A has happened, B has resulted. If we let A happen again, B will probably happen.
Pretty rock-solid, if you ask me. If you replace A with "The government has reduced the people's right to privacy, in order to increase the government's power" and B with "The people have grown to accept their reduced rights, and the government has still wanted more power", you have the current situation.
If we (or rather, "they," as I'm not British) accept this invasion, then the government will likely be left wanting more, and the people will grow ever more complacent. It's happened every time thus far, why think that it'll be different this time?
It doesn't look like a Wiimote replacement. If anything, it's a Classic Controller with grips slapped on. The summary makes it seem like it's to replace the Wiimote.
What part of "the Classic Controller Pro, a new input device for the Wii of a more typical design than the Wii Remote" was lost on you?
Re:Gattaca is a fantastic movie
on
Designer Babies
·
· Score: 1
No, no, no. Clearly he is referring to the fact that it is in Netflix's free streaming library.:P
You have to consider what is best for society. If news is unprotected, then it's in everyone's best interest to copy the facts from another source. It's a prisoner's dilemma, and unfortunately greedy companies ALWAYS choose to defect, which means anyone who isn't a sucker will have to either defect as well (leaving us with no source for news whatsoever) or change the rules of the game (which the AP is trying to do).
It seems like it could be made pretty safe. Have the receiver constantly sending a keep alive signal back to the satellite as long as the power beam is on target. If the beam drifts off target for any reason, the keep alive stops, and the satellite will stop sending down energy until it can be properly realigned. It does mean that you lose power for a bit, but that's probably preferable to losing power AND nuking some poor schmuck's house.
Do you have a source for that? It seems hard to believe that Earth could have shed the equivalent of half its current mass in genetic material alone...
One of the projects I got to work in my first year of undergrad was a flaming standing wave generator. While Jacob's ladders and Theremins are cool, you can't actually *see* what's going on... not so with the flaming standing wave!
The actual name is the Ruben Tube (not be confused with a Rubix Cube), and it's a fairly simple design, too. Just a hollow tube with holes along the top. One side has a hard cap with a place to attach a gas tube, as with a Bunsen burner. The other side has flexible cap, with a speaker pointing at it.
Turn on the gas, light the tube, and play a constant frequency over the speaker. It sets up a standing, longitudinal wave in the tube, which means compressed and sparse areas of the gas. This lets the students see the wave in the flames, and makes it look like the much-easier-to-visualize transverse wave.
It's easy, it's cool, it's visual, and it helps students wrap their minds around an important aspect of physics. All in all, a great experiment.
Slashdot Mirror
Spansion only ever made Flash memory, AFAIK. GlobalFoundries makes processors, which is why Intel can make these threats.
Another difference: GlobalFoundries still exists, and is making a new fab in Saratoga. Spansion, on the other hand, is trading for two cents.
The people who protest sex ed in the US would likely want this program to be abstinence only. It's not, so they probably think it's horrible.
One is implying that women are innately lacking in ability.
The other explicitly says it has nothing to do with ability.
Are you *really* intellectually dishonest enough to pretend that they're the same?
That's absurd. Men don't need to throw away their entire career to have a family. Why should women? This bias, though natural in origin, needs to be corrected. We are allowing there to be a massive road block between half of the world's population and a career in science, and in the same breath complaining that not enough people are pursuing careers in science.
Studies have shown that couples who DON'T have children are, on average, significantly happier.
Yeah, you're REALLY gonna need to cite that. I know of not a single person who, in the twilight years of their lives, have looked back and said, "Ya know, having kids was a complete waste of my time."
You may be happier for a few years, but if your last decades are spent wishing you had a family, are you really happier overall?
We have. Other countries have not. Many third world nations are developing nukes precisely because they're seen as a necessary indicator of power.
The more countries have nukes, the more likely it is that they get used, either by a state, or by an independent group which somehow got its hands on one of the weapons.
Do you really feel safer with God only knows how many nukes floating around Pakistan? And what about when Iran gets them? And after them, who's next?
My six year old laptop can run Windows 7 acceptably. It's not fast, but it's good enough to be usable for email, web-browsing, even YouTube videos. Therefore, I'd expect W7 to run fine on netbooks.
That said, there's the question of why you'd want it on a netbook. It's different enough from previous versions of the OS that your grandma would probably prefer to just use XP, like she has been for years. And if the user is willing to accept a change, why pay for W7 when you can use some form of Linux, custom tailored for netbooks?
The main draw of Windows is compatibility with all the apps out there. Netbooks aren't going to be running those apps, so why bother with Windows?
Duh... kdawson is a well known MS shill.
What is this "as if IP has real meaning beyond your own mindset, as if it is a part of reality that exists outside of you political environment" nonsense?
Of COURSE it has a real meaning. It's not a propaganda term! That phrase has been around for well over a century!!
And it absolutely has meaning in China. They're a member of WIPO! They've signed treaties! Do you know anything about the issue!?
But, of course, since you're raging against evil "imaginary" property (that one actually IS a propaganda term, btw), you will of course be modded up. This is /., after all.
And who, pray tell, wants to cure cancer to the tune of billions of dollars, knowing full well that they'll never receive a cent of it back?
People are generally good, but they're not suckers. No one has that sort of money to burn.
How? How on Earth would you get paid for your work on an invention, if anyone could take it and produce it without paying you a dime?
Researchers at a university? Gone. Fabless microchip companies? Forget 'em. DRM? It'll be everywhere, since it will be the only form of protection to exist.
This is the absolute WORST idea I've seen in quite some time.
Assuming absolutely 0% overhead, you'd be right.
the research products almost never make it to real products that people can use
You could say the same for just about any real research. I'm still grateful that it's being done. Far too many companies are content to focus on the next quarter while leaving the research to academia.
Every time the Sun has set, it has risen.
The Sun set a few hours ago for me, yet I'm confident that it will rise again.
I don't need a deductive proof to know it.
Or another example, if I flip a coin and have it land heads 100 times in a row, I can be pretty confident that if I flip it again, it will land on heads again. "Gamblers' Fallacy!" you might mistakenly claim. But it's not... the odds a of a fair coin landing on heads a hundred times in a row are on the order of 1 in 10^30. More likely, I have found a biased coin.
To consider your "gulp of saltwater at the ocean" example, you are thinking only of an isolated incident. That doesn't make a pattern. Now, if you swallowed a mouthful of saltwater every single time you went to the beach, twenty times in a row, then yes, I'd say it's likely that you will swallow yet another on your 21st visit.
Deductive logic is great for mathematicians. For everything else, inductive logic is our best tool.
I believe that the slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy in most cases. (To implement laws that you don't want through what? Political momentum?)
The slippery slope argument is a logical fallacy only when it's used as deductive reasoning. But when you apply inductive reasoning, which is arguably much more applicable to politics, the slippery slope holds up nicely.
Every time A has happened, B has resulted.
If we let A happen again, B will probably happen.
Pretty rock-solid, if you ask me. If you replace A with "The government has reduced the people's right to privacy, in order to increase the government's power" and B with "The people have grown to accept their reduced rights, and the government has still wanted more power", you have the current situation.
If we (or rather, "they," as I'm not British) accept this invasion, then the government will likely be left wanting more, and the people will grow ever more complacent. It's happened every time thus far, why think that it'll be different this time?
What is the difference between "compressed" and "encrypted".
Whether or not it's in the government sanctioned format, of course.
It doesn't look like a Wiimote replacement. If anything, it's a Classic Controller with grips slapped on. The summary makes it seem like it's to replace the Wiimote.
What part of "the Classic Controller Pro, a new input device for the Wii of a more typical design than the Wii Remote" was lost on you?
No, no, no. Clearly he is referring to the fact that it is in Netflix's free streaming library. :P
... rather than improperly blaming Microsoft
Woah, woah, woah.... just where do you think you are?
Neither. RTFA.
a "hot news" misappropriation claim is viable when:
(i) a plaintiff generates or gathers information at a cost; ...
(iii) a defendant's use of the information constitutes free riding on the plaintiff's efforts; ...
You have to consider what is best for society. If news is unprotected, then it's in everyone's best interest to copy the facts from another source. It's a prisoner's dilemma, and unfortunately greedy companies ALWAYS choose to defect, which means anyone who isn't a sucker will have to either defect as well (leaving us with no source for news whatsoever) or change the rules of the game (which the AP is trying to do).
More power to them.
And yet the links always get slashdotted. I suppose it's like New York City, where no drives on account of all the traffic.
It seems like it could be made pretty safe. Have the receiver constantly sending a keep alive signal back to the satellite as long as the power beam is on target. If the beam drifts off target for any reason, the keep alive stops, and the satellite will stop sending down energy until it can be properly realigned. It does mean that you lose power for a bit, but that's probably preferable to losing power AND nuking some poor schmuck's house.
Do you have a source for that? It seems hard to believe that Earth could have shed the equivalent of half its current mass in genetic material alone...
One of the projects I got to work in my first year of undergrad was a flaming standing wave generator. While Jacob's ladders and Theremins are cool, you can't actually *see* what's going on... not so with the flaming standing wave!
The actual name is the Ruben Tube (not be confused with a Rubix Cube), and it's a fairly simple design, too. Just a hollow tube with holes along the top. One side has a hard cap with a place to attach a gas tube, as with a Bunsen burner. The other side has flexible cap, with a speaker pointing at it.
Turn on the gas, light the tube, and play a constant frequency over the speaker. It sets up a standing, longitudinal wave in the tube, which means compressed and sparse areas of the gas. This lets the students see the wave in the flames, and makes it look like the much-easier-to-visualize transverse wave.
It's easy, it's cool, it's visual, and it helps students wrap their minds around an important aspect of physics. All in all, a great experiment.