Maybe not, though I don't think the truth is necessarily any more favorable to the "average Joe". People forgot that there before TV, people would read, have hobbies, take a walk, have a picnic, etc. Now people put on American Idol and say how much they hate that show. When asked why they still watch it, they respond that there's nothing else on.
There are plenty of ways to get true randomness using hardware. Keyboard click timings, hard drive seek time, radioactive decay monitoring (probably the best, since its based on quantum nondeterminism), capacitor level checking, CCD camera in a dark coffee can, and a bunch of others. No pure software solution exists, though.
But why is it even there? It makes no sense for anyone who doesn't have the backward compatibility issues that Microsoft has. A standard should be for everyone, not just one company.
More powerful engines do not necessarily mean less gas efficient engines. You might need to use more gas/sec when accelerating off the stop light, but you'll also be accelerating for fewer seconds. Two cars cruising at the same speed, mass, and drag coefficient will need exactly the same power to maintain speed, which is where modern variable valve timing systems can win out (thanks, Honda!)
Since the 1960s, cars have had to add a lot of weight for safety systems, do away with leaded additives, and start using catalytic converters. These have all substantially reduced engine power. That's why muscle cars of the '60s easily had 500hp, while the poor DeLorean of the early '80s was considered a sports car at only 130hp (and that actually was comparable to other sports cars of the time).
There were good reasons for doing all the things above, but we need to keep them in mind when comparing old cars to new ones.
If Microsoft wants to convince me that their standard is worthwhile, here's what they can do: have two teams, working completely independently with just the standard document as a guide, be able to create compatible implementations. This is the process the IETF uses before a Proposed Standard can become a Draft Standard (as outlined in RFC2026).
Yes, it would take years for two teams to implement a 6000+ page standards doc, only to have them come back and ask what "autoSpaceLikeWord95" is supposed to mean. That alone should tell us a lot about the quality of the standard.
Not to mention that any skyline that old in the US is right hand drive and had a lot of effort put into it just to get it over here. Which leads to the question of why a dealership would lend out such a car to a high school kid.
I'm also anti-NASA. However, I stopped associating being anti-NASA with being anti-space exploration years ago. The most interesting things in space over the next 10 years will probably come from private companies.
Just make up your mind about being regulated or not. If you want to take tax payer money, then you're going to be regulated. If you don't want to be regulated, you can't have tax payer money.
PairNIC has always been my choice. However, IIRC, all registers have to go through Network Solutions for.com/.net/.org/.info/.biz domains, so there's a limit to how much "voting with your feet" you can do.
Except that PE today consists largely of simple exercises and the most non-competitive games you can find, because it'd be a real tragedy to tell a child that they might not be good at something.
When ISPs ask "who's going to pay for new infrastructure?", the answer should aways be "you are, in the form of reinvesting your profits into new development, like every other business does, you useless fracks". The "useless frack" part should be put at the end of most statements when dealing with government-mandated monopolies.
Prius also doesn't run on leaded gas, is restricted by a cat, and is much heavier than the equivalent 70s car due to safety systems. However, you're right to point out that the Prius isn't as good as it should be. Not when diesel cars of comparable size are getting the same or better millage.
In any case, the prevalence of the Prius and other hybrids on the road shows that people really are looking to conserve due to the effects of a free market, even if they're not going about it in the best way.
That's not how copyrights work. By default, you have no right to do anything with someone else's copyrighted work. It's only through a license agreement that you have any right to even use Creative's code. If the EULA is entirely null-and-void, then there's nothing else that gives you right to use it. Note that certain portions of an EULA wouldn't necessarily hold up in court (technically, they could say that you must sacrifice your firstborn on the Temple of Sho'ka'rei, but that doesn't mean it'd hold up in court), however there has to be something that gives you the right to use it.
Mind you, that all means nothing in the court of public opinion. While Creative might have had the legal right, their actions made them look like senseless bullies. It would have been far more productive to give the guy a job and release his changes officially.
From the FCC using a flawed broadband policy that was started under Clinton and continued under Bush. Note that FCC Commissioners and executives are appointed by the President.
Specifically, the policy is that there be one company handling a given broadband technology for a certain area. One company handles cable, another handles DSL, etc. The problem is that there aren't enough technologies to go around, and some of them overlap within a single company. Fiber to the Curb service is obviously different from DSL, but the telco is in the best position to deploy both of them. At this point, it should be obvious that the cable/DSL duopoly isn't enough to produce healthy competition between providers.
This policy is the reason the FCC pulls out power line broadband every few years, even though the power lines were never designed to handle data, and it's been shown to create interference in the ham radio bands.
Switching administrations would have been a great time to reverse this policy, but it didn't happen, for whatever reason. A cynical person could conclude that the ISP have too much influence on the FCC, which wouldn't go away just by changing Presidents.
In this case, "success" means that local monopolies are continuing to make money on existing infrastructure without having to reinvest any of it into new infrastructure.
I signed up for a business-class cable modem a few years back (being willing to pay the premium so I could host my own email and not have to worry about bandwidth caps), and my contract is about to expire (defaulting to month-to-month after the expiration). In that time, the cable company hasn't increased the speed for business users at all. Normally, I'd look for a competitor, but none of the local companies have DSL coverage near my house. There's one company offering WiMax service, but I find WiMax questionable.
So apparently, in the few years that I've had my cable modem, almost nobody has invested a single penny in infrastructure upgrades. Meanwhile, the Koreans had 10 megabit fiber connections years ago. I can only conclude that "a little ahead" is a measure of profit margins, not usefulness.
One of the things the LHC is set to verify is if magnetic monopoles do, indeed, exist. There are a few theories out there that predict such a thing, and no serious theories that say it can't. Their existence could improve a lot of useful devices (electric motors, maglev, etc.), and their non-existence would mean revisiting some theories, so the answer is interesting either way.
So you approach the study with a critical mindset. Which is exactly what you should be doing with any study. Therefore, the funding source is irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe not, though I don't think the truth is necessarily any more favorable to the "average Joe". People forgot that there before TV, people would read, have hobbies, take a walk, have a picnic, etc. Now people put on American Idol and say how much they hate that show. When asked why they still watch it, they respond that there's nothing else on.
Further, what exactly is a "liquid gas"?
There are plenty of ways to get true randomness using hardware. Keyboard click timings, hard drive seek time, radioactive decay monitoring (probably the best, since its based on quantum nondeterminism), capacitor level checking, CCD camera in a dark coffee can, and a bunch of others. No pure software solution exists, though.
It's always important to have repeatable results.
That's what I told my parents when I blinded my little brother. They didn't believe me.
Close. Supercapacitors are getting around to making such a thing workable.
But why is it even there? It makes no sense for anyone who doesn't have the backward compatibility issues that Microsoft has. A standard should be for everyone, not just one company.
Mod -1: Unproductive Complaining
More powerful engines do not necessarily mean less gas efficient engines. You might need to use more gas/sec when accelerating off the stop light, but you'll also be accelerating for fewer seconds. Two cars cruising at the same speed, mass, and drag coefficient will need exactly the same power to maintain speed, which is where modern variable valve timing systems can win out (thanks, Honda!)
Since the 1960s, cars have had to add a lot of weight for safety systems, do away with leaded additives, and start using catalytic converters. These have all substantially reduced engine power. That's why muscle cars of the '60s easily had 500hp, while the poor DeLorean of the early '80s was considered a sports car at only 130hp (and that actually was comparable to other sports cars of the time).
There were good reasons for doing all the things above, but we need to keep them in mind when comparing old cars to new ones.
If Microsoft wants to convince me that their standard is worthwhile, here's what they can do: have two teams, working completely independently with just the standard document as a guide, be able to create compatible implementations. This is the process the IETF uses before a Proposed Standard can become a Draft Standard (as outlined in RFC2026).
Yes, it would take years for two teams to implement a 6000+ page standards doc, only to have them come back and ask what "autoSpaceLikeWord95" is supposed to mean. That alone should tell us a lot about the quality of the standard.
Not to mention that any skyline that old in the US is right hand drive and had a lot of effort put into it just to get it over here. Which leads to the question of why a dealership would lend out such a car to a high school kid.
I'm also anti-NASA. However, I stopped associating being anti-NASA with being anti-space exploration years ago. The most interesting things in space over the next 10 years will probably come from private companies.
It's worse than that. In a two-party system, it's easy enough to split that amount evenly, effectively buying both candidates.
Just make up your mind about being regulated or not. If you want to take tax payer money, then you're going to be regulated. If you don't want to be regulated, you can't have tax payer money.
PairNIC has always been my choice. However, IIRC, all registers have to go through Network Solutions for .com/.net/.org/.info/.biz domains, so there's a limit to how much "voting with your feet" you can do.
So far, you have the only response that understands what I was getting at.
Except that PE today consists largely of simple exercises and the most non-competitive games you can find, because it'd be a real tragedy to tell a child that they might not be good at something.
When ISPs ask "who's going to pay for new infrastructure?", the answer should aways be "you are, in the form of reinvesting your profits into new development, like every other business does, you useless fracks". The "useless frack" part should be put at the end of most statements when dealing with government-mandated monopolies.
Prius also doesn't run on leaded gas, is restricted by a cat, and is much heavier than the equivalent 70s car due to safety systems. However, you're right to point out that the Prius isn't as good as it should be. Not when diesel cars of comparable size are getting the same or better millage.
In any case, the prevalence of the Prius and other hybrids on the road shows that people really are looking to conserve due to the effects of a free market, even if they're not going about it in the best way.
Yeah, all the SUVs being replaced with Priuses are just a figment of a diseased mind.
That's not how copyrights work. By default, you have no right to do anything with someone else's copyrighted work. It's only through a license agreement that you have any right to even use Creative's code. If the EULA is entirely null-and-void, then there's nothing else that gives you right to use it. Note that certain portions of an EULA wouldn't necessarily hold up in court (technically, they could say that you must sacrifice your firstborn on the Temple of Sho'ka'rei, but that doesn't mean it'd hold up in court), however there has to be something that gives you the right to use it.
Mind you, that all means nothing in the court of public opinion. While Creative might have had the legal right, their actions made them look like senseless bullies. It would have been far more productive to give the guy a job and release his changes officially.
Sit ten guys down with thirty pictures, and you're going to get 10 different #1's
True, but all ten will tend to agree on which ones are beautiful and which ones aren't. It's just the #1 position that will be different.
Besides, don't we all dream of the future when robots can sit at bars and say "Hey, checkout the RAM on that baby!" No, I don't either.
From the FCC using a flawed broadband policy that was started under Clinton and continued under Bush. Note that FCC Commissioners and executives are appointed by the President.
Specifically, the policy is that there be one company handling a given broadband technology for a certain area. One company handles cable, another handles DSL, etc. The problem is that there aren't enough technologies to go around, and some of them overlap within a single company. Fiber to the Curb service is obviously different from DSL, but the telco is in the best position to deploy both of them. At this point, it should be obvious that the cable/DSL duopoly isn't enough to produce healthy competition between providers.
This policy is the reason the FCC pulls out power line broadband every few years, even though the power lines were never designed to handle data, and it's been shown to create interference in the ham radio bands.
Switching administrations would have been a great time to reverse this policy, but it didn't happen, for whatever reason. A cynical person could conclude that the ISP have too much influence on the FCC, which wouldn't go away just by changing Presidents.
In this case, "success" means that local monopolies are continuing to make money on existing infrastructure without having to reinvest any of it into new infrastructure.
I signed up for a business-class cable modem a few years back (being willing to pay the premium so I could host my own email and not have to worry about bandwidth caps), and my contract is about to expire (defaulting to month-to-month after the expiration). In that time, the cable company hasn't increased the speed for business users at all. Normally, I'd look for a competitor, but none of the local companies have DSL coverage near my house. There's one company offering WiMax service, but I find WiMax questionable.
So apparently, in the few years that I've had my cable modem, almost nobody has invested a single penny in infrastructure upgrades. Meanwhile, the Koreans had 10 megabit fiber connections years ago. I can only conclude that "a little ahead" is a measure of profit margins, not usefulness.
One of the things the LHC is set to verify is if magnetic monopoles do, indeed, exist. There are a few theories out there that predict such a thing, and no serious theories that say it can't. Their existence could improve a lot of useful devices (electric motors, maglev, etc.), and their non-existence would mean revisiting some theories, so the answer is interesting either way.
So you approach the study with a critical mindset. Which is exactly what you should be doing with any study. Therefore, the funding source is irrelevant.