The linked io9 article suggests that the rotting skin effects are due to the horribly impure byproducts. Krokodil gets you addicted from the potency of the Desomorphine. Krokodil rots off your flesh because of the gasoline and paint thinner used in its production and then not purified out before injection. Apparently gasoline circulating in your veins causes blood vessels to burst leading to necrosis.
it is kind of absurdly low hanging fruit. When we get a case with a judge laying the smack down on a patent troll firm abusing actual patents they own, that is run by actual lawyers with a real office, then we will have news.
Take the health care act. The court had to first rule that the congress meant the law to become something they specifically stated that it was not. A tax. Then make it legal that way.
Congresscritters can call legislation whatever they want in order to get votes for it. But that doesn't change its nature. If it looks like a tax, swims like a tax, and quacks like a tax, then it is probably a tax regardless of what some senator's PR page called it. SCOTUS ruled on what it was, not what it was called.
See, that's the funny thing about observer bias. If you are yourself unlikely to be in the market for the new iPhone, your social circle is probably skewed towards the same demographic as yourself, and therefore not a good indicator for the actual demand. I, on the other hand, have heard plenty of chatter on social media, as well as in actual in-person conversations about people planning on getting the new phone, whether to get the 5C or 5S, etc.
Why should they announce something other than a phone at their phone event?
For the last few years, they have focused their events on only a single product. They announce new mac models at WWDC, and then have separate events throughout the fall for iPhone, iPod, and iPad. If they are going to introduce a brand new product line, which many still believe they will, it won't be at their phone event.
Most of the molecules in the body are not too big, as most of the body's molecules are water molecules. That is why the researchers used water as the body analogue. But when you talk about vaporizing water, you are just talking about turning it into water vapor, not separating it into its atomic parts. So to really get an accurate energy estimate for a phaser set to disintegrate, you need to calculate the energy required to turn the water fraction of the body into water vapor, plus the energy required to break down the biomolecule (fats and proteins, etc.) fraction and calcified tissue (bones & teeth) fraction into volatiles.
This is in fact what happened to JC Penny. They were lagging behind Kohl's et. al. in the discount retail market, so they brought in a new CEO who implemented a new business model based on no-bs pricing. The model was a great way of differentiating themselves, and probably would have paid off if given enough time for consumers to get used to it. But when consumers didn't jump on the model instantly and they had a couple of bad quarters, the CEO was fired before the model was given enough time to see if it could be successful in the long term.
Yep. More tech companies should strive to go private. To be successful in the tech sector, you really need a long term roadmap, and R&D that may not pay off for years. But Wall Street only wants businesses to make decisions that have an immediate positive effect on the bottom line, and punishes companies that make decisions that hurt now but might pay off big later. That perspective might make sense for old industry blue chip stock companies that have done the exact same thing for the last 50+ years, but it is completely at odds with implementing a vision in a technology company.
That was my thought as well. With the hype the summary gave to the unboxing of a robot, I was expecting a self-unboxing robot. Not only would it be genuinely cool, it might even have some DARPA value. Imagine a C130 or Chinook offloading a crate of boxed robots, and the Future Soldier (tm) just has to push a button and you have a squad of Big Dogs ready to go.
Instead, we got an inert robot being hoisted up by a rope pulley. I am sure that the robot itself is quite advanced, but it might as well have just been the Mythbusters unboxing their latest Buster dummy for all of the high tech sophistication shown in the video.
This is so true, and if I had mod points, you'd be getting them.
What we should be doing, and what gender (or classification of your choice) blind really means is that women should be treated the same as men at the interview and at the annual review. It is true that in many fields there is still a wage disparity between women and men doing the same job with the same skills and qualifications. That is a genuine wrong that must be fixed. What <classification> blind doesn't mean is that job hiring or school admissions should be quota based, as quotas always seem to cause more trouble than they are worth. True equality is on a case by case basis, rather than a statistical measure across populations.
Counselors in many mental health fields are mandated reporters. In other words, if you are seeking treatment for Pedophilic Disorder, and in the course of treatment you mention the name of a child you abused, your counselor is legally obligated to report that to the authorities. So if you mention a specific instance of abuse to your counselor, there is no longer any doctor-patient confidentiality at all protecting that information.
That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pedophilic Disorder was added to the DSM so that it could be used as a defense. If you are on trial for child abuse, you could claim insanity and be sentenced to treatment for PD rather than jail time.
Also, while suspension is an air bed, acceleration and deceleration is done with magnetic linear accelerators - described in the document as electric motors unrolled. It is possible that the magnetic field of those might impinge on the cabin, so it isn't a non-issue.
Remember,/. likes to trash talk another company with the same M.O. of taking existing languishing technologies, figuring out what magic sauce they are lacking, turn them into viable products people actually care about, and then actually deliver.
Elon Musk is the new Steve Jobs. They run their companies in a very similar way, and the value of that way goes over the head of the average/.er who can't comprehend that innovation is far more often figuring out how to make an existing technology better as opposed to conjuring up never-before-heard-of categories out of thin air.
I wanted a happy feel, so notes from the major scale, focussing on I, III, IV, V, and VIII (the octave).
But yes, it's clear that to the article writer 'octave' was simply a buzzword, and he didn't grasp the significance of the roman numerals. So he assumed that those numerals were different sorts of 'octaves'.
Copyrights are not unlimited in any major country that I know of.
I think he is referring to the de facto unlimited nature of copyright in the United States, in that due to the lobbying power of the Walt Disney Company, the copyright term will never be less than the age of Mickey Mouse. As long as they stay in business, Disney will forever keep pushing congress to extend the term of copyrights in order to ensure that Mickey will never enter the public domain. Therefore, anything copyrighted after Mickey Mouse was copyrighted effectively has an unlimited copyright term.
Can you specify contract are you talking about that makes it ok for you to break the law if, in your opinion, the duration of copyright is too long?
If the law itself is unjust, the remedy must not come from within the law but from without. In other words, civil disobedience is the only way to affect change if the system itself is corrupt. Insisting on the use of an existing law to combat an unjust system of laws is equivocating.
When I saw the title, I thought it might actually be a communication protocol based on light fields, which could be pretty neat. Kind of a beamed data hologram. Such a system might have a potential for high data density as the amount of data in a light field is pretty crazy. The reality of this just being a blinking LED was quite the let down.
It is only possible to make software that can never break down when all possible values of all input parameters are known ahead of time. In practice, this is rarely the case.
Anecdote is not the singular of data. When aggregate studies show that more money is to be made developing for iOS, two games by one studio that buck that trend do not negate the aggregate. It just provides an interesting data point that happens to be an outlier. Independent studies that unbiasedly sample a large number of apps that are on both platforms which show that the conventional wisdom is wrong would be newsworthy. As would analysis of apps like this to see why they buck the trend, and whether that difference can be capitalized in other apps. But to use a single data point simply as a counterpoint to a trend is laughable.
You contradict yourself. First, you rightly point out that there will be fast years and slow years, and that people forget history in the slow years with their silly predictions of apple's doom.
You then forget history yourself when you bring up pointless bs about their stock price. Seriously, zoom out the stock chart to show the last 5 or 10 years, and you will see in context that the drop of $300 is merely correcting an anomaly. From 2009 to 2011, aapl had sustainable growth. Then in 2012 there was a crazy rise followed by a subsequent correction. The loss of $300 per share was a loss of imaginary value, and it has leveled off over the last couple of months anyway. Plus, the value of aapl is so at the mercy of the whims of the mutual funds and "analysts" in the short and medium term that it will take years to see what effect Cook himself will have had on the stock in the first place. Cook was just as responsible for the $300/share boom in the first half of 2012 as he was for the $300/share crash in the second half of 2012. Not much at all.
Still doesn't negate GP's #2. Fusion is still hard. The sun produces fusion due to the immense gravity at its core, and thermonuclear weapons produce fusion after being kickstarted by a fission explosion. Not exactly harnessable energy. Hence the qualification of cold fusion. If you can show that somebody extracted more energy than they put in, AND the amount they put in was something a bit more manageable than the energy of a fission explosion or the entire gravitational potential energy of the sun, then you will have something and we can talk.
Slashdot Mirror
The linked io9 article suggests that the rotting skin effects are due to the horribly impure byproducts. Krokodil gets you addicted from the potency of the Desomorphine. Krokodil rots off your flesh because of the gasoline and paint thinner used in its production and then not purified out before injection. Apparently gasoline circulating in your veins causes blood vessels to burst leading to necrosis.
it is kind of absurdly low hanging fruit. When we get a case with a judge laying the smack down on a patent troll firm abusing actual patents they own, that is run by actual lawyers with a real office, then we will have news.
Take the health care act. The court had to first rule that the congress meant the law to become something they specifically stated that it was not. A tax. Then make it legal that way.
Congresscritters can call legislation whatever they want in order to get votes for it. But that doesn't change its nature. If it looks like a tax, swims like a tax, and quacks like a tax, then it is probably a tax regardless of what some senator's PR page called it. SCOTUS ruled on what it was, not what it was called.
See, that's the funny thing about observer bias. If you are yourself unlikely to be in the market for the new iPhone, your social circle is probably skewed towards the same demographic as yourself, and therefore not a good indicator for the actual demand. I, on the other hand, have heard plenty of chatter on social media, as well as in actual in-person conversations about people planning on getting the new phone, whether to get the 5C or 5S, etc.
Why should they announce something other than a phone at their phone event?
For the last few years, they have focused their events on only a single product. They announce new mac models at WWDC, and then have separate events throughout the fall for iPhone, iPod, and iPad. If they are going to introduce a brand new product line, which many still believe they will, it won't be at their phone event.
Most of the molecules in the body are not too big, as most of the body's molecules are water molecules. That is why the researchers used water as the body analogue. But when you talk about vaporizing water, you are just talking about turning it into water vapor, not separating it into its atomic parts. So to really get an accurate energy estimate for a phaser set to disintegrate, you need to calculate the energy required to turn the water fraction of the body into water vapor, plus the energy required to break down the biomolecule (fats and proteins, etc.) fraction and calcified tissue (bones & teeth) fraction into volatiles.
This is in fact what happened to JC Penny. They were lagging behind Kohl's et. al. in the discount retail market, so they brought in a new CEO who implemented a new business model based on no-bs pricing. The model was a great way of differentiating themselves, and probably would have paid off if given enough time for consumers to get used to it. But when consumers didn't jump on the model instantly and they had a couple of bad quarters, the CEO was fired before the model was given enough time to see if it could be successful in the long term.
Yep. More tech companies should strive to go private. To be successful in the tech sector, you really need a long term roadmap, and R&D that may not pay off for years. But Wall Street only wants businesses to make decisions that have an immediate positive effect on the bottom line, and punishes companies that make decisions that hurt now but might pay off big later. That perspective might make sense for old industry blue chip stock companies that have done the exact same thing for the last 50+ years, but it is completely at odds with implementing a vision in a technology company.
That was my thought as well. With the hype the summary gave to the unboxing of a robot, I was expecting a self-unboxing robot. Not only would it be genuinely cool, it might even have some DARPA value. Imagine a C130 or Chinook offloading a crate of boxed robots, and the Future Soldier (tm) just has to push a button and you have a squad of Big Dogs ready to go.
Instead, we got an inert robot being hoisted up by a rope pulley. I am sure that the robot itself is quite advanced, but it might as well have just been the Mythbusters unboxing their latest Buster dummy for all of the high tech sophistication shown in the video.
This is so true, and if I had mod points, you'd be getting them.
What we should be doing, and what gender (or classification of your choice) blind really means is that women should be treated the same as men at the interview and at the annual review. It is true that in many fields there is still a wage disparity between women and men doing the same job with the same skills and qualifications. That is a genuine wrong that must be fixed. What <classification> blind doesn't mean is that job hiring or school admissions should be quota based, as quotas always seem to cause more trouble than they are worth. True equality is on a case by case basis, rather than a statistical measure across populations.
Counselors in many mental health fields are mandated reporters. In other words, if you are seeking treatment for Pedophilic Disorder, and in the course of treatment you mention the name of a child you abused, your counselor is legally obligated to report that to the authorities. So if you mention a specific instance of abuse to your counselor, there is no longer any doctor-patient confidentiality at all protecting that information.
That being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Pedophilic Disorder was added to the DSM so that it could be used as a defense. If you are on trial for child abuse, you could claim insanity and be sentenced to treatment for PD rather than jail time.
Also, while suspension is an air bed, acceleration and deceleration is done with magnetic linear accelerators - described in the document as electric motors unrolled. It is possible that the magnetic field of those might impinge on the cabin, so it isn't a non-issue.
As the document is a preliminary feasibility study, I think high level analysis of potential use cases is definitely in scope.
Remember, /. likes to trash talk another company with the same M.O. of taking existing languishing technologies, figuring out what magic sauce they are lacking, turn them into viable products people actually care about, and then actually deliver.
Elon Musk is the new Steve Jobs. They run their companies in a very similar way, and the value of that way goes over the head of the average /.er who can't comprehend that innovation is far more often figuring out how to make an existing technology better as opposed to conjuring up never-before-heard-of categories out of thin air.
The original quote from Jacklin's blog is:
I wanted a happy feel, so notes from the major scale, focussing on I, III, IV, V, and VIII (the octave).
But yes, it's clear that to the article writer 'octave' was simply a buzzword, and he didn't grasp the significance of the roman numerals. So he assumed that those numerals were different sorts of 'octaves'.
Copyrights are not unlimited in any major country that I know of.
I think he is referring to the de facto unlimited nature of copyright in the United States, in that due to the lobbying power of the Walt Disney Company, the copyright term will never be less than the age of Mickey Mouse. As long as they stay in business, Disney will forever keep pushing congress to extend the term of copyrights in order to ensure that Mickey will never enter the public domain. Therefore, anything copyrighted after Mickey Mouse was copyrighted effectively has an unlimited copyright term.
Can you specify contract are you talking about that makes it ok for you to break the law if, in your opinion, the duration of copyright is too long?
If the law itself is unjust, the remedy must not come from within the law but from without. In other words, civil disobedience is the only way to affect change if the system itself is corrupt. Insisting on the use of an existing law to combat an unjust system of laws is equivocating.
weather != climate
Or were you just trolling?
When I saw the title, I thought it might actually be a communication protocol based on light fields, which could be pretty neat. Kind of a beamed data hologram. Such a system might have a potential for high data density as the amount of data in a light field is pretty crazy. The reality of this just being a blinking LED was quite the let down.
Hand pump out enough gasoline to start a generator, and use it to power the pumps for dispensing?
It is only possible to make software that can never break down when all possible values of all input parameters are known ahead of time. In practice, this is rarely the case.
Anecdote is not the singular of data. When aggregate studies show that more money is to be made developing for iOS, two games by one studio that buck that trend do not negate the aggregate. It just provides an interesting data point that happens to be an outlier. Independent studies that unbiasedly sample a large number of apps that are on both platforms which show that the conventional wisdom is wrong would be newsworthy. As would analysis of apps like this to see why they buck the trend, and whether that difference can be capitalized in other apps. But to use a single data point simply as a counterpoint to a trend is laughable.
I would argue that he has in fact mismanaged Microsoft quite well. I have never seen anybody do a better job at mismanaging a company.
You contradict yourself. First, you rightly point out that there will be fast years and slow years, and that people forget history in the slow years with their silly predictions of apple's doom.
You then forget history yourself when you bring up pointless bs about their stock price. Seriously, zoom out the stock chart to show the last 5 or 10 years, and you will see in context that the drop of $300 is merely correcting an anomaly. From 2009 to 2011, aapl had sustainable growth. Then in 2012 there was a crazy rise followed by a subsequent correction. The loss of $300 per share was a loss of imaginary value, and it has leveled off over the last couple of months anyway. Plus, the value of aapl is so at the mercy of the whims of the mutual funds and "analysts" in the short and medium term that it will take years to see what effect Cook himself will have had on the stock in the first place. Cook was just as responsible for the $300/share boom in the first half of 2012 as he was for the $300/share crash in the second half of 2012. Not much at all.
Still doesn't negate GP's #2. Fusion is still hard. The sun produces fusion due to the immense gravity at its core, and thermonuclear weapons produce fusion after being kickstarted by a fission explosion. Not exactly harnessable energy. Hence the qualification of cold fusion. If you can show that somebody extracted more energy than they put in, AND the amount they put in was something a bit more manageable than the energy of a fission explosion or the entire gravitational potential energy of the sun, then you will have something and we can talk.
If the tax rate on money taken out of a 401k was obscenely high, you just might.