I once saw a proposal to research the use of neutrinos for communications with submarines....
....Some of the (perhaps insurmountable) obstacles were: 1) Modulating a neutrino beam. 2) Figuring out where the sub is in order to point the beam at it. 3) Detecting the beam (it passes thru matter like empty space, recall).
Don't know about the others, but couldn't you take care of number two by having the sub initiate contact periodically since it would likely be communicating with a fixed position?
this case reminds me of etoy vs etoys.com. etoy existed far longer than etoys.com, but etoys still sued etoy for taking etoy.com.
Neither of these qualify as cybersquatting. If I were to grab etoy.com or some other $trademark.com and waited to see if the folks owning the $trademark name wanted to talk dollars, THAT would be cybersquatting. In both of these cases the original user had created a site and weren't looking to sell.
During the opening ceremonies of the Olympics in Nagano, Japan, musicians from all over the world performed Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" in sync. Granted, they had to use broadcast delays to compensate for the large distances that signals had to travel, but it worked.
I'm certain that was done via satellite. On the net those delays are subject to change dynamically. They may be able to start together, but without dedicated end-to-end bandwidth I don't see them (or should I say 'hear them') ending together. 'Course, you could always call it Jazz.
Reliable, useful, scalable technology can be developed without the presence of a monopolistic profit-hungry entity...
True, but without that monopolistic entity the infrastructure that makes telephony and even the net possible just wouldn't be there. It's one thing to order up a point to point circuit from your local telco or one of the big three, but what would things be like if you had to run a cable from A to B instead.
Just trying to interject some balance. When I mentioned that no one seemed to be taking advantage of the loophole I meant that I'd not read of any districts dropping evolution from their curriculum, not that they'd be reading from Genesis. As far as the disclaimer, I don't see that it presents a problem. I'm no expert, but I read enough to see many theories within the theory of evolution. Einstein didn't have a problem with the 'Theory of Relativity' being applied to his work. There are theories in many branches of science and I think the bristling at the term 'theory' is one of the things that leaves evolutionary theories vulnerable to attack. Another is the jumping to press regarding 'incredible' fossil discoveries only to have to retract later. It seems that both creationists and evolutionists can be duped when someone 'discovers' something that 'proves' some portion of their own beliefs.
Sometimes understanding other cultures/races is difficult because of conflicting signals. I felt that way while reading your post. It seems that in the first part of your paragraph, you would prefer I stop trying NOT to make racial distinctions but in the second half you are offended by racial distinctions. You finish with an attempt to define the collective thought process of a racial group that you are not a part of. This isn't a criticism, but a request for better information.
....contrary to popular myth (insert Kansas State High School curriculum here)....
Actually, the Kansas State Board removed a requirement. All the commentary on Slashdot implies (or states outright) that they replaced the Evolutionary educational requirement with a religious one. I have not heard of a single public school that has opted to take advantage of the new loophole. Private schools were already doing whatever they wanted.
Exactly. I probably wouldn't write negative information with regard to my employer because I wouldn't want that known. I can and do say negative things about other businesses, but I restrict my statements to the facts and how I've chosen to respond.
I would think there would be sufficient differences in raw vs. residue traces left in or on the body to tune the device to recognize those distinctions.
I was just thinking along similar lines. I know a few people who reload their own shotgun shells and bullets as well as a few muzzle loaders. I'd be surprised if they didn't trigger alarms as a result.
That's funny. Almost governmental, giving with one hand what you take away with the other.
If you check out my previous posts you'll see that I don't have a problem with a need to preserve privacy. I think all of us have things in our lives, past or present, that we'd just as soon weren't made public (except the sociopaths).
Thanks! I never expected this conversation under this topic. How refreshing (even if you do come across like a 'pompous git'). I enjoy "classical" music but must confess an abyssmal lack of knowledge about it. Although I have always thought that "If it ain't Baroque, don't fix it."
My favorites are Bach, Beethoven and Copeland, the three B's of the..... Oh, no, wait.....
Ummm. Hate to mention this, but your Wrongco Hedge-O-Matic at 4 feet thick wouldn't hold a candle to Weryk's 4 meter thick subwoofer. Unless a metre is smaller than a meter.
This has nothing to do with those nutty "gun-lovin americans"
I like those guys better than those gutty "nun-lovin americans"!
Every year the Wichita (Kansas) Symphony does an outdoor concert at the conclusion of the 'River Festival' that includes the 1812 Overture. A battery of cannons is supplied by a Fort Riley artillery crew. Very impressive.
...there are quite a number who would brutally murder you for being gay.
I think there are actually very few who would do so. The media tend to play up the connection in a case like Matt Sheppard's (sp?) murder.
Similarly, people who support abortion are also often the victims of zealous murderous fundamentalists.
While abortion providers have been targeted, I don't believe the numbers justify the use of the term 'often'. Also, zeal and belief in the fundamentals of an individual's religion are superfluous and inflammatory with respect to this argument. There are just as many people who are zealous in their beliefs and twisted enough in their thinking to kill people simply because they are christians (or muslims, or bahai, etc.) as in school shootings in Kentucky, Littleton and the Baptist church in Texas. You could probably take the numbers of churchgoers killed in these three attacks and come up with a significantly larger number of deaths than those of abortion providers.
I recently read about a prominent atheist who was kidnapped and then was never seen again.
If you're referring to Madelyn O'Hare, she and two of her children are presumed murdered by an associate for $500,000.00 in gold (I think that's the right amount) and not because of her beliefs or activism.
These examples are similar to the idea that we are all being spied on in that they are exaggerated in and even sensationalistic. Does that mean that there aren't people who would just as soon kill homosexuals as look at them? No, I'm certain that there are, just as I'm certain that there are a few people who would target someone because of their religious beliefs or the color of their skin, or any number of other differences. They don't all belong to a single demographic, but a single mindset that says it's OK to use violence to achieve your ends. There are a few who would carry that as far as murder, far more who would beat the living daylights out of you, and still more who would scheme against you or rail against you publicly. I don't believe the increases from group to group to be incremental but exponential. This is not based on profiling, but simple observation.
Geeze, this isn't NT we're talking about here. You've been able to remotely administer linux since it got network support. Have these guys ever heard of telnet?
Used to remotely admin AT&T 3B2's with a dial up connection from a dumb terminal.
Slashdot Mirror
At a buck per address they'd have a hard time finding buyers. At less than 4 cents per name your loner made less than two bucks for the day.
1) Modulating a neutrino beam.
2) Figuring out where the sub is in order to point the beam at it.
3) Detecting the beam (it passes thru matter like empty space, recall).
Don't know about the others, but couldn't you take care of number two by having the sub initiate contact periodically since it would likely be communicating with a fixed position?
Neither of these qualify as cybersquatting. If I were to grab etoy.com or some other $trademark.com and waited to see if the folks owning the $trademark name wanted to talk dollars, THAT would be cybersquatting. In both of these cases the original user had created a site and weren't looking to sell.
I'm certain that was done via satellite. On the net those delays are subject to change dynamically. They may be able to start together, but without dedicated end-to-end bandwidth I don't see them (or should I say 'hear them') ending together. 'Course, you could always call it Jazz.
True, but without that monopolistic entity the infrastructure that makes telephony and even the net possible just wouldn't be there. It's one thing to order up a point to point circuit from your local telco or one of the big three, but what would things be like if you had to run a cable from A to B instead.
'Putt putt, to the Pizza Hut'
I thought it was a gel cube about that size that held a terrabyte and it was well before 100Mhz was even on the horizon (late 80's, early 90's maybe?)
Well, didn't you see what he wanted to put on the drive?
Shoot! That's easy. It's a wrench. I usually have to think a spell before I can answer the tough ones.
How does the post constitute abuse?
Just trying to interject some balance. When I mentioned that no one seemed to be taking advantage of the loophole I meant that I'd not read of any districts dropping evolution from their curriculum, not that they'd be reading from Genesis. As far as the disclaimer, I don't see that it presents a problem. I'm no expert, but I read enough to see many theories within the theory of evolution. Einstein didn't have a problem with the 'Theory of Relativity' being applied to his work. There are theories in many branches of science and I think the bristling at the term 'theory' is one of the things that leaves evolutionary theories vulnerable to attack. Another is the jumping to press regarding 'incredible' fossil discoveries only to have to retract later. It seems that both creationists and evolutionists can be duped when someone 'discovers' something that 'proves' some portion of their own beliefs.
carlos
Actually, the Kansas State Board removed a requirement. All the commentary on Slashdot implies (or states outright) that they replaced the Evolutionary educational requirement with a religious one. I have not heard of a single public school that has opted to take advantage of the new loophole. Private schools were already doing whatever they wanted.
carlos
Starring Jane Y-Man?
I thought it was a parody site when I read Hatch's quote.
Pardon me. I thought I was logged into Slashdot.
carlos
Exactly. I probably wouldn't write negative information with regard to my employer because I wouldn't want that known. I can and do say negative things about other businesses, but I restrict my statements to the facts and how I've chosen to respond.
I would think there would be sufficient differences in raw vs. residue traces left in or on the body to tune the device to recognize those distinctions.
I was just thinking along similar lines. I know a few people who reload their own shotgun shells and bullets as well as a few muzzle loaders. I'd be surprised if they didn't trigger alarms as a result.
That's funny. Almost governmental, giving with one hand what you take away with the other.
If you check out my previous posts you'll see that I don't have a problem with a need to preserve privacy. I think all of us have things in our lives, past or present, that we'd just as soon weren't made public (except the sociopaths).
My favorites are Bach, Beethoven and Copeland, the three B's of the..... Oh, no, wait.....
Ummm. Hate to mention this, but your Wrongco Hedge-O-Matic at 4 feet thick wouldn't hold a candle to Weryk's 4 meter thick subwoofer. Unless a metre is smaller than a meter.
I like those guys better than those gutty "nun-lovin americans"!
Every year the Wichita (Kansas) Symphony does an outdoor concert at the conclusion of the 'River Festival' that includes the 1812 Overture. A battery of cannons is supplied by a Fort Riley artillery crew. Very impressive.
I think there are actually very few who would do so. The media tend to play up the connection in a case like Matt Sheppard's (sp?) murder.
Similarly, people who support abortion are also often the victims of zealous murderous fundamentalists.
While abortion providers have been targeted, I don't believe the numbers justify the use of the term 'often'. Also, zeal and belief in the fundamentals of an individual's religion are superfluous and inflammatory with respect to this argument. There are just as many people who are zealous in their beliefs and twisted enough in their thinking to kill people simply because they are christians (or muslims, or bahai, etc.) as in school shootings in Kentucky, Littleton and the Baptist church in Texas. You could probably take the numbers of churchgoers killed in these three attacks and come up with a significantly larger number of deaths than those of abortion providers.
I recently read about a prominent atheist who was kidnapped and then was never seen again.
If you're referring to Madelyn O'Hare, she and two of her children are presumed murdered by an associate for $500,000.00 in gold (I think that's the right amount) and not because of her beliefs or activism.
These examples are similar to the idea that we are all being spied on in that they are exaggerated in and even sensationalistic. Does that mean that there aren't people who would just as soon kill homosexuals as look at them? No, I'm certain that there are, just as I'm certain that there are a few people who would target someone because of their religious beliefs or the color of their skin, or any number of other differences. They don't all belong to a single demographic, but a single mindset that says it's OK to use violence to achieve your ends. There are a few who would carry that as far as murder, far more who would beat the living daylights out of you, and still more who would scheme against you or rail against you publicly. I don't believe the increases from group to group to be incremental but exponential. This is not based on profiling, but simple observation.
carlos
Used to remotely admin AT&T 3B2's with a dial up connection from a dumb terminal.