The parasite/disease thing is definitely a problem, but I don't think it's an insurmountable one. Look at all the cattle and sheep in Australia, as far as I know they never transmitted anything that bad to the local species. Anyway, pumping every animal you bring over full of antibiotics before you let them go would cut down on the chance of you importing anything bad. Of course, the African animals might catch something bad from the locals, but again, I think it's worth the risk to have a large population of African savannah animals that aren't constantly at risk from poachers and/or government instability.
Does anyone else find the term "blinkenlights" extremely annoying? And no, I don't really care that it was in the jargon file ("oooh, the jargon file").
I was marked down redundant for that? Didn't see anyone else express their annoyance, but I'm glad I'm not alone...
Well, I didn't mean large salt water animals of course. Couldn't see one doing well against say a sperm whale (unless it was out of the water I guess). I wasn't sure about a polar bear; probably the polar would win, just because those things can get so damn big. But if they were equal size a grizzly bear would probably win.
Some of these species are very close to extinction; isn't it worth it just to create another breeding population to be on the safe side? Besides, while I'm all for helping African countries develop, what's best for people in Africa (more land brought under cultivation, better infrastructure) could be very different than what people need. You also have to take into consideration cultural factors; you have had a rise, for example, of native middle and upper classes in a couple of countries. All well and good, but this has created a profitable market for "bush meat". So the gorilla and chimpanzee populations have seen a substantial hit because these middle and upper classes feel that chicken is a remnant of imperialism.
Does anyone else find the term "blinkenlights" extremely annoying? And no, I don't really care that it was in the jargon file ("oooh, the jargon file").
I support this wholeheartedly. Yes, the introduction of other species in the past has decimated Australia's natural wildlife, but what this guy is talking about seems to be very different.
There is a huge difference between inadvertently introducing small species such as rats and rabbits across the country (well, starting at coastal shipping ports), and introducing large mammals into a controlled region. Large mammals such as elephants and hippos are much easier to track, and more importantly will typically have offspring every few years (about every two years for hippos and rhinos, four years or more for elephants, and two years for lions, though the latter usually have a few cubs per litter), while rabbits breed like well, rabbits.
Personally I think he'll have a very hard time of doing this succesfully; it's not easy to create an African savannah ecosystem from an Australian outback, and megafauna are notoriously slow at increasing population (thats one of the reasons we need reserves in the first place).
I read somewhere once that the gold rush crowd in the western US (forget if it was California or Alaska, think it was the former) sometimes amused themselves by importing large predators from around the world, and pitting them against grizzly bears. They discovered a grizzly bear can kill just about anything in a minute or so.
The exasperating thing is that each editor might post what, a story or two a day? What's so hard about clicking on older stuff, and doing a quick search for a keyword? It'll what, add 30 seconds to your workday?
Well unless they have a time machine I doubt they're going to be able to release the linux and windows versions of word at the same time. Anyway if everyone on slashdot who claims to only run linux had bought those games when they came out, maybe they'd have a chance, but they didn't. Can't use the "they already had the windows version" with that group; they just don't like paying for stuff.
/etc/ld.so.conf is your friend. Should be in bold in more books!
The problem though is when ld.so.conf doesn't point to anything the program needs, or if the library is out-of-date or too new it doesn't really matter if the program finds it. Like I said its fixable, but it takes far too long tracking down everything you need (at one point I got so sick of trying to get mesa-gl to work I just gave up).
I found out by mistake that you select with left and paste with middle. Again, why is this not in more books!
Admittedly that would have been helpful to know, though last time I was running linux, I had a two button mouse. I figured since edit/copy then edit/paste didn't work across most windows, it was just broken.
You're starting to think like a marketer. "Our product is too hard to use." "Well let's advertise that it's EASY, that will solve the problem." Linux IS difficult to use. Worse than that it's annoying a lot of the time. God forbid you don't have the exact version of a library in the exact place that a new program expects. God forbid you want to cut and paste something from one window to another. I've been using Linux for about 6 years, and I've run into a lot of simple problems that are solveable but take too much time. And since I might not use it again for another year or two, when I DO have to use it again I've forgotten about it.
Yes, a crippled version wouldn't sell at all. A fully functional version, on the other hand, would be a wild success story, as Loki or Id would attest to. Oh, wait...
That's pretty much how it went. I admit I misspoke though; he didn't actually sell them, but he did try to, only to find that potential sellers found the idea repugnant. He then donated some of the treasure that he had no right to, and the reparations he paid to Turkey were a small fraction of the actual value of the collection. He was an inveterate liar, and there is substantial evidence to suggest that the real discoverer of Troy was the British archeologist Frank Calvert, who made the mistake of going to Schliemann for help funding a dig.
I looked it over and I didn't see anything nearly as objectionable as the DMCA; it seems to be a fairly simple statement that an author has certain rights to his or her work. The only one that really made me wonder was this:
Compilations of data or other material, in any form, which by reason of the selection or arrangement of their contents constitute intellectual creations, are protected as such. This protection does not extend to the data or the material itself and is without prejudice to any copyright subsisting in the data or material contained in the compilation. [See the agreed statement concerning Article 5]
Seemed a little vague, though I assume the actual data entered would be protected by copyright law anyway.
The rest of it can be summarized as follows:
Let's all follow the Berne convention.
For a long time they were discounted. But that was before the rich guy with the bee in his bonet funded the dig that discovered the ruins of Troy - the first of several successes using the technique of analyzing legends and seeing what sites in the real world might match.
Then the rich guy plundered the site he discovered, smuggling priceless architectural treasures out of Turkey, then selling them to the highest bidder.
This must be a new, unknown civilization. The Aztecs did not formally settle in Mexico until ~1200 AD, the Mayans florished in the Yucatan around ~150 AD, and the Olmec started out around 1000 AD.
Actually, the Olmecs started around 1000 BC. Yes, I know it was a typo, I'm just being mean.
An archaeology textbook that happened to be in the vicinity of my computer lists the first Mayan communities at about 1000 B.C., and were well-established by 600 B.C., when they were constructing their pyramids.
Personally, if this is man-made (yes, it probably is, but I don't know if I'd rule out natural geologic processes yet), I doubt very much it would be anywhere near 6000 years old; the oldest known semi-urban civilizations in the New World only date from about 2000 BC, and even then only a handful of groups were moving away from a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. I also doubt that this would be a previously undiscovered civilization, if the remains have only been found in such a small area. Probably would be an outpost of one of the mesoamerican groups, though I'm not sure how they would get there. It's kind of a long way from Tenochtilan, and if they traveled up around the Gulf you'd expect to find other sites with similiar architecture.
Slashdot Mirror
The parasite/disease thing is definitely a problem, but I don't think it's an insurmountable one. Look at all the cattle and sheep in Australia, as far as I know they never transmitted anything that bad to the local species. Anyway, pumping every animal you bring over full of antibiotics before you let them go would cut down on the chance of you importing anything bad. Of course, the African animals might catch something bad from the locals, but again, I think it's worth the risk to have a large population of African savannah animals that aren't constantly at risk from poachers and/or government instability.
When I first read "workstations for poor 3-d artists" I thought great, finally a computer that recognizes my artistic shortcomings...
what's best for people in Africa (more land brought under cultivation, better infrastructure) could be very different than what people need.
That's supposed to read "could be very different than what animals need." of course.
Does anyone else find the term "blinkenlights" extremely annoying? And no, I don't really care that it was in the jargon file ("oooh, the jargon file").
I was marked down redundant for that? Didn't see anyone else express their annoyance, but I'm glad I'm not alone...
Well, I didn't mean large salt water animals of course. Couldn't see one doing well against say a sperm whale (unless it was out of the water I guess). I wasn't sure about a polar bear; probably the polar would win, just because those things can get so damn big. But if they were equal size a grizzly bear would probably win.
Some of these species are very close to extinction; isn't it worth it just to create another breeding population to be on the safe side? Besides, while I'm all for helping African countries develop, what's best for people in Africa (more land brought under cultivation, better infrastructure) could be very different than what people need. You also have to take into consideration cultural factors; you have had a rise, for example, of native middle and upper classes in a couple of countries. All well and good, but this has created a profitable market for "bush meat". So the gorilla and chimpanzee populations have seen a substantial hit because these middle and upper classes feel that chicken is a remnant of imperialism.
Does anyone else find the term "blinkenlights" extremely annoying? And no, I don't really care that it was in the jargon file ("oooh, the jargon file").
I support this wholeheartedly. Yes, the introduction of other species in the past has decimated Australia's natural wildlife, but what this guy is talking about seems to be very different.
There is a huge difference between inadvertently introducing small species such as rats and rabbits across the country (well, starting at coastal shipping ports), and introducing large mammals into a controlled region. Large mammals such as elephants and hippos are much easier to track, and more importantly will typically have offspring every few years (about every two years for hippos and rhinos, four years or more for elephants, and two years for lions, though the latter usually have a few cubs per litter), while rabbits breed like well, rabbits.
Personally I think he'll have a very hard time of doing this succesfully; it's not easy to create an African savannah ecosystem from an Australian outback, and megafauna are notoriously slow at increasing population (thats one of the reasons we need reserves in the first place).
I wouldn't wish anything like that on the australians.
I guess we'll have to find some other way to pay them back for unleashing Rupert Murdoch on us...
I read somewhere once that the gold rush crowd in the western US (forget if it was California or Alaska, think it was the former) sometimes amused themselves by importing large predators from around the world, and pitting them against grizzly bears. They discovered a grizzly bear can kill just about anything in a minute or so.
The exasperating thing is that each editor might post what, a story or two a day? What's so hard about clicking on older stuff, and doing a quick search for a keyword? It'll what, add 30 seconds to your workday?
I don't think they should go to jail, I just think someone should smack the stupid out of them.
That's a great sig; I'll have to steal it and start using it in conversation...
Well unless they have a time machine I doubt they're going to be able to release the linux and windows versions of word at the same time. Anyway if everyone on slashdot who claims to only run linux had bought those games when they came out, maybe they'd have a chance, but they didn't. Can't use the "they already had the windows version" with that group; they just don't like paying for stuff.
The problem though is when ld.so.conf doesn't point to anything the program needs, or if the library is out-of-date or too new it doesn't really matter if the program finds it. Like I said its fixable, but it takes far too long tracking down everything you need (at one point I got so sick of trying to get mesa-gl to work I just gave up).
I found out by mistake that you select with left and paste with middle. Again, why is this not in more books!
Admittedly that would have been helpful to know, though last time I was running linux, I had a two button mouse. I figured since edit/copy then edit/paste didn't work across most windows, it was just broken.
It is as if you were trying to watch TV and a guy with a "Buy M&Ms" sign would step in front of the TV while my show is going on.
Actually I thought it was more like a guy running in circles around your TV, screaming "BUY M&Ms", and pelting you with them.
Sure I hate spam with a passion, but why is everyone so up in arms about it?
Because we hate it with a passion?
You're starting to think like a marketer. "Our product is too hard to use." "Well let's advertise that it's EASY, that will solve the problem." Linux IS difficult to use. Worse than that it's annoying a lot of the time. God forbid you don't have the exact version of a library in the exact place that a new program expects. God forbid you want to cut and paste something from one window to another. I've been using Linux for about 6 years, and I've run into a lot of simple problems that are solveable but take too much time. And since I might not use it again for another year or two, when I DO have to use it again I've forgotten about it.
Yes, a crippled version wouldn't sell at all. A fully functional version, on the other hand, would be a wild success story, as Loki or Id would attest to. Oh, wait...
That's not quite how it went.
That's pretty much how it went. I admit I misspoke though; he didn't actually sell them, but he did try to, only to find that potential sellers found the idea repugnant. He then donated some of the treasure that he had no right to, and the reparations he paid to Turkey were a small fraction of the actual value of the collection. He was an inveterate liar, and there is substantial evidence to suggest that the real discoverer of Troy was the British archeologist Frank Calvert, who made the mistake of going to Schliemann for help funding a dig.
Seemed a little vague, though I assume the actual data entered would be protected by copyright law anyway.
The rest of it can be summarized as follows:
Let's all follow the Berne convention.
Yep, that's why I said New World. What's kind of funny is none of these things would even qualify as a town now, but we refer to them as urban.
For a long time they were discounted. But that was before the rich guy with the bee in his bonet funded the dig that discovered the ruins of Troy - the first of several successes using the technique of analyzing legends and seeing what sites in the real world might match.
Then the rich guy plundered the site he discovered, smuggling priceless architectural treasures out of Turkey, then selling them to the highest bidder.
This must be a new, unknown civilization. The Aztecs did not formally settle in Mexico until ~1200 AD, the Mayans florished in the Yucatan around ~150 AD, and the Olmec started out around 1000 AD.
Actually, the Olmecs started around 1000 BC. Yes, I know it was a typo, I'm just being mean.
An archaeology textbook that happened to be in the vicinity of my computer lists the first Mayan communities at about 1000 B.C., and were well-established by 600 B.C., when they were constructing their pyramids.
Personally, if this is man-made (yes, it probably is, but I don't know if I'd rule out natural geologic processes yet), I doubt very much it would be anywhere near 6000 years old; the oldest known semi-urban civilizations in the New World only date from about 2000 BC, and even then only a handful of groups were moving away from a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. I also doubt that this would be a previously undiscovered civilization, if the remains have only been found in such a small area. Probably would be an outpost of one of the mesoamerican groups, though I'm not sure how they would get there. It's kind of a long way from Tenochtilan, and if they traveled up around the Gulf you'd expect to find other sites with similiar architecture.
Yep, that would come in handy.
...
Bystander: Excuse me, do you have the time?
Me: Yes, its been 1007744600 seconds since midnight of January 1st, 1970.
Bystander: