You're right, it did. The scenario the GGP commented on clearly involved copyright, so I construed its IP to mean that, but taken at face value, it is a post about patents as well.
In a free market one side always dominates the other, the deal is never fair. The idea that someone will come along and undercut the big guys is flawed because it is in their interest to just join the big guys in screwing everyone [...]
It's a bit more complicated than that, from Wikipedia
There are several factors that will affect the firms' ability to monitor a cartel:[7]
Number of firms in the industry
Characteristics of the products sold by the firms
Production costs of each member
Behaviour of demand
Frequency of sales and their characteristics
Unfortunately, all of these factors push for a stable cartel in the phone company business: There are relatively few companies, and it is hard to make a new one, they all sell more or less the same thing and have the same production cost, the demand is not fluctuating and the market consists of many small sales. So in this case, you are right, it will be hard to get a functional market, which makes it a prime place to put in effect consumer protection laws.
Patents are not copyright are not trademarks. Different rules apply. IIRC, the GPP has a point in the case of copyright. Had it been a patent, letting people get in deeper had been fine.
I don't argue that Monsanto is not evil, I simply can't find any evidence that they are evil in exactly the way GPP claimed. If it exists, I would very much like to know. If it doesn't exist, it is counterproductive to claim that it does, as people who want to argue that Monsanto is not evil can show that that claim is false, strengthening their argument. It is not hard to find examples of Monsanto's true evilness, and bringing up something that can be substantiated is much more effective.
What's the refractive index of the core of fibers? I wouldn't be surprised if it was 1.3 or above, making the upper range of the speed in copper higher than the speed in fiber.
Poisoners tends to be women, or at least did back when poisoning was still easy to detect. That counts as sneaky, though I don't think it evens the numbers.
How many men have to deal in a daily battle of sexist, matriarchal social norms that cause them to be members of the poorest classes in society
It is true that there tends to be more men then women on the top societies. However, it is also true that there tends to be more men than women on the very bottom of societies. Just look at the prison population in... well... anywhere. Look at who gets to die in battle for their country, or for their clan, or for their family. Look at who lives on the streets, at least in western societies.
For a woman to succeed in science she has to work 3 time harder than a man, undergo 3 times as much critical scrutiny by a male dominated peer review and sweat 3 times harder about getting it right in the first place.
There was a study done on all new Danish professorships some years ago (I think i covered 5 years). Only 25% of them were given to women. However, for 50% of the positions, there were no female applicants. When the number of applications were taken into consideration, female applicants were around twice as likely to get the job (I don't remember the exact number). This was before the Danish universities started discriminating against male applicants by giving the departments an economic bonus for hiring a female professor.
Mind you, the US seems to have much more sexism than Europe*, at least from what I can gather in comments online, so that could be the reason for the differences in outlook.
* OK, at least Denmark. Given how long time it took me to figure out how different it was in the US, I can't really talk about any other countries.
It is a "new" way to move heat. In night vision goggles, it could move heat from the sensor to the casing, as only the sensor (and perhaps the optics) must be cold. However, I would imagine a Peltier element being more efficient, and that this mostly makes sense where a) You have no heat sink (mostly in space, I guess) or b) The cooling devices is not in direct contact with what is being cooled (the technique is already used in this way to cool gasses for making Bose Einstein condensates, where the thing being cooled is so cold that having it contact the cooling device defeats the purpose).
The Danish police is not allowed to interfere in industrial conflicts (workers conflicts? Union conflicts? I am not sure of the correct term). The first step would be to complain to the Work Court (again, this is probably not the correct term. It is a special court to determine what is legal in such conflicts), and the police will only do something after the Work Court has said that a given practice is illegal. For the restaurants, it is legal to stop delivering anything except mail, but not to stop removing the garbage due to public health concerns. For the scaffolding workers, I don't know if it has been taken to the Work Court. I would imagine it to be hard to do, as the union is not officially backing it, so Work Court will not acknowledge it as an industrial conflict, and the police will insist that it is, but I don't know if this is the case.
Meanwhile, in Denmark, the scaffolding workers have been taking down scaffolds put up by non-union workers for years, and threatened anyone interfering to stay away while they did it. Or, in their own version, they were just there to protest the non-union workers, and the members were so emotionally effected that they started to take down the scaffolds spontaneously, and there was nothing the union could do to stop them. This has happened many times, and it seems there is nothing to do about it.
In the less severe end, we have had restaurants that could not get mail and could not get rid of their garbage because they had an agreement with the wrong union, and a brewery who could not get their beer driven to the stores.
So yes, if given enough reign, unions can force you to hire their members, or at the very least, to reach an agreement with them. From my knowledge, though, this is very far from the situation in the US. It a balance, and being on either extreme is bad, as the market works best with the two sides having about equal negotiation power.
I'm sorry but I gotta agree with GP, this is a company that sues farmers whose crops are infected by their crappy GMOs [...]
Do you have a quote on that? All I can find is a) Farmers being sued for knowingly breeding their crop for pesticide resistance from Monsanto crops and b) Farmers being sued for breach of contract with Monsanto, which implies they already are in a contractual relationship with Monsanto. None of these scenarios can be described as "crops [...] infected by [...] crappy GMOs".
Here's another question you can add:
* 4. Why the fuck don't we test GMO crops for 20+ years before we start feeding them to people, and esp. children?
Does that go for all new cultivars, or GMO ones? If it goes for all cultivars, how would that have effected the green revolution? If it only applies to GMOs, why?
I'd like to be able to take the same stance on GMO foods, but the lobbyists don't like the idea of giving me the information I require to make decisions regarding foodstuffs by requiring "This Contains Genetically Engineered Food" on labels.
Why not get the producers of non-GMO products to label their products in stead? They should have something to gain by doing it. Or learn for which plants GM cultivars are used, and only buy organic versions of products that contain those plants? AFAIK, only a handful of species have GM cultivars which are used in production, so what you ask for is possible today, and it only requires little effort.
I thought Tetrahedron Letters in general was notorious for allowing very low quality articles to be printed. There must be a reason my professor in organic chemistry insisted on calling it "tetrahedron liars".
Some abstract numbers are similar though if you look purely at the rat brain hardware and ignore everything on its software side.
How exactly do you look at brain hardware and ignore software? My understanding was that, when it comes to wetware, the two are so hopelessly intertwined that talking of one without the other makes no sense. Am I wrong in that assumption? How?
The skin is far to good a barrier for osmosis to work with alcohol and (I think) caffeine. It works with nicotine, which is why nicotine patches are so easy to make, and if you dissolve thing in DMSO first, though.
As a business why would I want to cure a person when I can keep making money by offering lifetime treatments?. That's just how it is with big Pharma, most intelligent people know this.
Big Pharma is actually more than one company, and company A doesn't care whether their cure for disease X makes the treatment of company B irrelevant.
If they started actually curing everything, their profits would fall and the markets would tank.
Because people can only get cancer once, and old people are not a better stream of revenue than young people, because Alzheimer medicine is not expensive.
They have a choice between selling someone a whole life really expensive medicines (well not to make, but to buy) or cure him.
No, medicine company A have the choice between becoming filthy rich by producing a more efficient AIDS medicine, or let medicine company B keep their revenue. The obvious choice should be clear.
We seem to be quite far already, having simulated the smallest functional unit of the rat neocortex years ago. The rest seems to be just a matter of scaling up (with all the problems that usually come from that, and probably more).
Y being exponentially in X usually means that Y=a*(b^X); If the expression is something like Y=c*X^d, Y is polynomial in X (or rises polynomially with X). For any a,b,c and d, there exists an x0, such that, for all X>x0, the first expression is greater than the last, and grows faster. This makes exponential growth quite separate from polynomial growth, and is why "growing exponentially" is the idiom it is. It is, however, frequently used when the rise is not exponential, such as in the link provided.
Why don't you google how many fracking sides already got closed because they contaminated the ground water?
Because they contaminated ground water, or because the allegedly contaminated ground water? AFAIK, there have only been one case where it has been shown that the contamination was from fracking. Please do inform me if I have missed any.
There is no epidemic of ground water contamination due to 'fracking'
OFC there is. Why are you not able to follow the daily news? Have no TV? Oh, but you have internet!
And we all know how correct information about scientific subjects are on TV and especially the internet.
I'm sorry, I didn't read all of your first post before answering.
If I understand the math correctly, if the canon can accelerate the rocket to the speed of the exhaust, that would save around 60% of the fuel. Wouldn't that be around on rocket step? And wouldn't leaving one step out save complexitity?
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, it did. The scenario the GGP commented on clearly involved copyright, so I construed its IP to mean that, but taken at face value, it is a post about patents as well.
In a free market one side always dominates the other, the deal is never fair. The idea that someone will come along and undercut the big guys is flawed because it is in their interest to just join the big guys in screwing everyone [...]
It's a bit more complicated than that, from Wikipedia
There are several factors that will affect the firms' ability to monitor a cartel:[7]
Number of firms in the industry
Characteristics of the products sold by the firms
Production costs of each member
Behaviour of demand
Frequency of sales and their characteristics
Unfortunately, all of these factors push for a stable cartel in the phone company business: There are relatively few companies, and it is hard to make a new one, they all sell more or less the same thing and have the same production cost, the demand is not fluctuating and the market consists of many small sales. So in this case, you are right, it will be hard to get a functional market, which makes it a prime place to put in effect consumer protection laws.
Thanks, I will look into it :-)
Patents are not copyright are not trademarks. Different rules apply. IIRC, the GPP has a point in the case of copyright. Had it been a patent, letting people get in deeper had been fine.
I don't argue that Monsanto is not evil, I simply can't find any evidence that they are evil in exactly the way GPP claimed. If it exists, I would very much like to know. If it doesn't exist, it is counterproductive to claim that it does, as people who want to argue that Monsanto is not evil can show that that claim is false, strengthening their argument. It is not hard to find examples of Monsanto's true evilness, and bringing up something that can be substantiated is much more effective.
What's the refractive index of the core of fibers? I wouldn't be surprised if it was 1.3 or above, making the upper range of the speed in copper higher than the speed in fiber.
Poisoners tends to be women, or at least did back when poisoning was still easy to detect. That counts as sneaky, though I don't think it evens the numbers.
How many men have to deal in a daily battle of sexist, matriarchal social norms that cause them to be members of the poorest classes in society
It is true that there tends to be more men then women on the top societies. However, it is also true that there tends to be more men than women on the very bottom of societies. Just look at the prison population in ... well ... anywhere. Look at who gets to die in battle for their country, or for their clan, or for their family. Look at who lives on the streets, at least in western societies.
For a woman to succeed in science she has to work 3 time harder than a man, undergo 3 times as much critical scrutiny by a male dominated peer review and sweat 3 times harder about getting it right in the first place.
There was a study done on all new Danish professorships some years ago (I think i covered 5 years). Only 25% of them were given to women. However, for 50% of the positions, there were no female applicants. When the number of applications were taken into consideration, female applicants were around twice as likely to get the job (I don't remember the exact number). This was before the Danish universities started discriminating against male applicants by giving the departments an economic bonus for hiring a female professor.
Mind you, the US seems to have much more sexism than Europe*, at least from what I can gather in comments online, so that could be the reason for the differences in outlook.
* OK, at least Denmark. Given how long time it took me to figure out how different it was in the US, I can't really talk about any other countries.
It is a "new" way to move heat. In night vision goggles, it could move heat from the sensor to the casing, as only the sensor (and perhaps the optics) must be cold. However, I would imagine a Peltier element being more efficient, and that this mostly makes sense where a) You have no heat sink (mostly in space, I guess) or b) The cooling devices is not in direct contact with what is being cooled (the technique is already used in this way to cool gasses for making Bose Einstein condensates, where the thing being cooled is so cold that having it contact the cooling device defeats the purpose).
The Danish police is not allowed to interfere in industrial conflicts (workers conflicts? Union conflicts? I am not sure of the correct term). The first step would be to complain to the Work Court (again, this is probably not the correct term. It is a special court to determine what is legal in such conflicts), and the police will only do something after the Work Court has said that a given practice is illegal. For the restaurants, it is legal to stop delivering anything except mail, but not to stop removing the garbage due to public health concerns. For the scaffolding workers, I don't know if it has been taken to the Work Court. I would imagine it to be hard to do, as the union is not officially backing it, so Work Court will not acknowledge it as an industrial conflict, and the police will insist that it is, but I don't know if this is the case.
Meanwhile, in Denmark, the scaffolding workers have been taking down scaffolds put up by non-union workers for years, and threatened anyone interfering to stay away while they did it. Or, in their own version, they were just there to protest the non-union workers, and the members were so emotionally effected that they started to take down the scaffolds spontaneously, and there was nothing the union could do to stop them. This has happened many times, and it seems there is nothing to do about it.
In the less severe end, we have had restaurants that could not get mail and could not get rid of their garbage because they had an agreement with the wrong union, and a brewery who could not get their beer driven to the stores.
So yes, if given enough reign, unions can force you to hire their members, or at the very least, to reach an agreement with them. From my knowledge, though, this is very far from the situation in the US. It a balance, and being on either extreme is bad, as the market works best with the two sides having about equal negotiation power.
I'm sorry but I gotta agree with GP, this is a company that sues farmers whose crops are infected by their crappy GMOs [...]
Do you have a quote on that? All I can find is a) Farmers being sued for knowingly breeding their crop for pesticide resistance from Monsanto crops and b) Farmers being sued for breach of contract with Monsanto, which implies they already are in a contractual relationship with Monsanto. None of these scenarios can be described as "crops [...] infected by [...] crappy GMOs".
Here's another question you can add: * 4. Why the fuck don't we test GMO crops for 20+ years before we start feeding them to people, and esp. children?
Does that go for all new cultivars, or GMO ones? If it goes for all cultivars, how would that have effected the green revolution? If it only applies to GMOs, why?
I'd like to be able to take the same stance on GMO foods, but the lobbyists don't like the idea of giving me the information I require to make decisions regarding foodstuffs by requiring "This Contains Genetically Engineered Food" on labels.
Why not get the producers of non-GMO products to label their products in stead? They should have something to gain by doing it. Or learn for which plants GM cultivars are used, and only buy organic versions of products that contain those plants? AFAIK, only a handful of species have GM cultivars which are used in production, so what you ask for is possible today, and it only requires little effort.
I thought Tetrahedron Letters in general was notorious for allowing very low quality articles to be printed. There must be a reason my professor in organic chemistry insisted on calling it "tetrahedron liars".
Some abstract numbers are similar though if you look purely at the rat brain hardware and ignore everything on its software side.
How exactly do you look at brain hardware and ignore software? My understanding was that, when it comes to wetware, the two are so hopelessly intertwined that talking of one without the other makes no sense. Am I wrong in that assumption? How?
I guess I should have used the ~, it just doesn't feel natural.
Anyway, I might have been slightly sarcastic, trying to show that the GPP's line of reasoning required some pretty unrealistic assumptions.
The skin is far to good a barrier for osmosis to work with alcohol and (I think) caffeine. It works with nicotine, which is why nicotine patches are so easy to make, and if you dissolve thing in DMSO first, though.
As a business why would I want to cure a person when I can keep making money by offering lifetime treatments?. That's just how it is with big Pharma, most intelligent people know this.
Big Pharma is actually more than one company, and company A doesn't care whether their cure for disease X makes the treatment of company B irrelevant.
If they started actually curing everything, their profits would fall and the markets would tank.
Because people can only get cancer once, and old people are not a better stream of revenue than young people, because Alzheimer medicine is not expensive.
They have a choice between selling someone a whole life really expensive medicines (well not to make, but to buy) or cure him.
No, medicine company A have the choice between becoming filthy rich by producing a more efficient AIDS medicine, or let medicine company B keep their revenue. The obvious choice should be clear.
We seem to be quite far already, having simulated the smallest functional unit of the rat neocortex years ago. The rest seems to be just a matter of scaling up (with all the problems that usually come from that, and probably more).
Just like you can't simulate weather in a computer because it contains no water?
Y being exponentially in X usually means that Y=a*(b^X); If the expression is something like Y=c*X^d, Y is polynomial in X (or rises polynomially with X). For any a,b,c and d, there exists an x0, such that, for all X>x0, the first expression is greater than the last, and grows faster. This makes exponential growth quite separate from polynomial growth, and is why "growing exponentially" is the idiom it is. It is, however, frequently used when the rise is not exponential, such as in the link provided.
Why don't you google how many fracking sides already got closed because they contaminated the ground water?
Because they contaminated ground water, or because the allegedly contaminated ground water? AFAIK, there have only been one case where it has been shown that the contamination was from fracking. Please do inform me if I have missed any.
There is no epidemic of ground water contamination due to 'fracking' OFC there is. Why are you not able to follow the daily news? Have no TV? Oh, but you have internet!
And we all know how correct information about scientific subjects are on TV and especially the internet.
It is ambiguous, though I can't see why a process for controlling female animal breeding behaviour should be "news for nerds".
I'm sorry, I didn't read all of your first post before answering.
If I understand the math correctly, if the canon can accelerate the rocket to the speed of the exhaust, that would save around 60% of the fuel. Wouldn't that be around on rocket step? And wouldn't leaving one step out save complexitity?